So getting an LLM to write an example project then dissecting the code and interrogating those choices, seems like a very good way to learn the idioms of another language.
Syntax is the easy stuff to learn. It’s any shifts in paradigms (eg pure functional vs imperative vs logic… etc) that takes time to learn.
And I say this as someone who’s written professional software in well over a dozen different languages. So I understand well the challenges learning something new.
Go and Rust have different idioms and syntax. But they occupy broadly similar paradigms.
For example, you don’t need to relearn how to do iteration like you would with a logic or pure functional language. You wouldn’t need to concepts like methods, like you would if you were coming from a stack based language. Etc
When you start reading, it helps to have some guidance towards good and relevant books, from e.g. school, mentors, criticism, etc. Then, when you encounter a "bad" book, you have some benchmarks from which you can build your capacity for analysis and critique. (Testing your analysis and critique with others helps, too.)
If you start with "bad" books, your concept of quality and what's possible is constrained. (Like when teenage boys read Atlas Shrugged.)
Reading slop code is a terrible way to build a mental benchmark for what's good, what's possible, what's elegant, and writing good code that is respectful to your fellow human beings.
The days of AI only being capable of producing unreliable slop code are long gone.
It is more like you wanting to build a bed out of wood so you hire a carpenter and watch them and ask questions about every step and maybe help a bit at the end.
I find it amazing to learn new programming things
Do I know exactly why X was choosen instead of Y? Do I know best practices? Do I know best libs etc? No, that is the reason to ask about it.
This isn’t like learning JavaScript and then expecting to be an expert in Prolog.
