[erlang-questions] Learning from the Manual
Tue Sep 20 12:18:40 CEST 2016
On 20. September 2016, Peter J Etheridge wrote:
> Dear List,I assume the Manual is clear to those who understand it.
> For noobies [like me], the Manual can be re-read and still not explain
> 'why' or 'how', or answer a question.Clearly, the Manual needs to be
> read in conjunction with ROK's email responses.
If you're a "noobie", you _can_ learn Erlang from the reference
manual. But it's hard work. Much easier to work through an
entertaining and carefully thought out tutorial, i.e.:
I took a look at his "datatype" section to see how he dealt with the
"there aren't actually any strings" problem. And it turns out there is
no string section! Perfect. Instead, the "Lists!" section shows
strings as one possible use of lists, which makes it a natural place
to present all the pitfalls. I'm looking at:
As someone who's written both manuals and FAQs, I think
learn-you-some-erlang has an unbeatable effort/benefit ratio,
especially for "noobies".
More information about the erlang-questions