I wouldn't want to read a tutorial by someone who has just learned it. I want a tutorial by someone who has ample experience.
How would you feel if I write a cookbook the first time my bread rolls didn't catch fire? ... to solicit feedback?
How would you feel if I write a cookbook the first time my bread rolls didn't catch fire? ... to solicit feedback?
I think this depends on what you're learning and how you've learned how to learn. As a beginner, I don't have any business going right to the master to ask about how I can improve my skills, so that I can "level up" and get the best results right away. Then again, we Western folk like pills and magic solutions for everything. We want results now, now, now.
If you're a white belt, go chat with a yellow or orange belt. If you're a blue belt, go chat with the purple belt. You don't walk up to a black belt and ask about the best way to tie your belt. No, you go ask the other white belts who have been at it for a little longer than you have, the people who have a couple of stripes on their belt. These people are closer to where you are in the given moment. They were in your shoes not too long ago, so they can help translate your mistakes, and help make sense of what you're thinking, asking, or learning.
When you see a really great photograph that touches you in ways you cannot describe, you're not seeing the product of an expensive camera, or a filter, you're seeing the result of someone who has taken hundreds of thousands of really shitty photographs over the course of their lifetime. You're seeing the results of maybe decades of practice. If this person writes a tutorial about taking photographs, can you learn from it? Sure. But they're not going to make you a better photographer by osmosis, you've got to go take a lot of pictures and read the beginners tutorials along the way.
So yeah, if I've been burning my bread rolls for months, I'd love to know that one thing you did to not set the house on fire every time you put rolls in the oven.
Pretty much all motor skills like like Karate can be performed okay, good, better, really good, etc. Similarly, I can take gradual baby steps from being a bad photographer towards becoming okay and then good.
But for most programming things, it either works correctly, or it doesn't. There's very little middle ground in an algorithm. Either it works to solve your problem, or it doesn't. Accordingly, I don't believe I can learn much from someone else's broken example in the way that I could learn from a (mediocre but slightly better than me) photographer.
The algorithm can be slow, slightly faster, fast.
The intro into framework can be in the middle too.
Beyond introductory material, it's a trade off of complexity and time as it's hard to compress the factors needed to demonstrate anything technical.
I think it's useful to share my experience on this: there isn't a whole lot of content on it and I think people could benefit from it. It's also helpful for myself, because writing it down clearly means I understand it better too now.
My background here is that I've been programming in Go for over 4 years and have worked with the Go ast package before (though not the analysis framework). I'm hardly a renowned expert on it, but I'd like to think that I have enough background/experience to know what I'm doing and communicate that information others.
But the category of articles that I was criticizing here is when unemployed students pretend to be the authority on topic X to improve their chances of getting hired. Those articles typically do not disclose the lack of experience of the other. Quite the contrary, some of them even make up achievements and/or credentials.