[nhumrich]

Then please enlighten us and tell us what you feel the article is about rather than a snarky "rtfm" comment.

Because I started reading. I got pretty far, and it was _still_ talking about integer types. The article is very long, and I gave up, not having any idea why I should keep reading. So saying the article isnt about them "at all" is wrong. Maybe, the int type thing is an intro to some other thing? But thats a long intro. So, tl;dr, at least not all the way. Why don't you tell us the point so we have desire to actually read it.

[Jtsummers]

Conveniently, there's a table of contents at the start that hints at the later topics:

  Different kinds of numbers
  Conversions and type inference
  Generics and enums
  Implementing traits
  Return position
  Dynamically-sized types
  Storing stuff in structs
  Lifetimes and ownership
  Slices and arrays
  Boxed trait objects
  Reading type signatures
  Closures
  Async stuff
  Async trait methods
  The Connect trait from hyper
  Higher-ranked trait bounds
  Afterword

So 17 sections, 16 technical (excluding the Afterword) and only the first two focus on the int/float stuff. So to answer your question:

> Maybe, the int type thing is an intro to some other thing?

No, it's not an intro, it's just the first two sections.

[jrimbault]

> I hope I was able to show, too, that I don't consider Rust the perfect, be-all-end-all programming language. There's still a bunch of situations where, without the requisite years of messing around, you'll be stuck. Because I'm so often the person of reference to help solve these, at work and otherwise, I just thought I'd put a little something together. [emphasis mine]

As you can also see from the table of contents at the top of the article page, it goes through a great breadth of topics. And you can use that table of contents to jump to the afterword.

[skorgu]

Since you don't seem to have commented on the article without reading it, my comment was not addressed to you. I'm not the article police; if you find something too long to read, decide not to read it, and move on with your life, we have no quarrel.

Honestly, I don't even mind the folks who do comment without reading. Comments are free, do what you like. I just find it mildly hilarious that 100% of the comments are about (the first) 3% of the article.