67 comments

[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 94.6 ms ] thread
So despite this...

> The Zigbook intentionally contains no AI-generated content—it is hand-written, carefully curated, and continuously updated to reflect the latest language features and best practices.

I just don't buy it. I'm 99% sure this is written by an LLM.

Can the author... Convince me otherwise?

> This journey begins with simplicity—the kind you encounter on the first day. By the end, you will discover a different kind of simplicity: the kind you earn by climbing through complexity and emerging with complete understanding on the other side.

> Welcome to the Zigbook. Your transformation starts now.

...

> You will know where every byte lives in memory, when the compiler executes your code, and what machine instructions your abstractions compile to. No hidden allocations. No mystery overhead. No surprises.

...

> This is not about memorizing syntax. This is about earning mastery.

The sweet irony of this post is that this very post itself is written by an LLM.
This looks fantastic. Pedagogically it makes sense to me, and I love this approach of not just teaching a language, but a paradigm (in this case, low-level systems programming), in a single text.

Zig got me excited when I stumbled into it about a year ago, but life got busy and then the io changes came along and I thought about holding off until things settled down - it's still a very young language.

But reading the first couple of chapters has piqued my interest in a language and the people who are working with it in a way I've not run into since I encountered Ruby in ~2006 (before Rails hit v1.0), I just hope the quality stays this high all the way through.

> Pedagogically it makes sense to me

It does not. It dives into compiler details on chapter 01, and smells heavily AI (not in a good way) as others have pointed out

It looks cool! No experience with Zig so can't comment on the accuracy, but I will take a look at it this week. Also a bit annoying that there is no PDF version that I could download as the website is pretty slow. After taking a look at the repository (https://github.com/zigbook/zigbook/tree/main), each page seems to be written in AsciiDoc, so I'll take a look about compiling a PDF version later today.
there's no way someone made this for free, where do I donate? im gonna get so much value from this this feels like stealing
Some text is unreadable because it is so small.
It was very hard to find a link to the table of contents… then I tried opening it and the link didn’t work. I’m on iOS. I’d have loved to take a look quickly what’s in the book…
I found it, maybe it was there all along. Go to chapters, then open the side menu with the hamburger button.
(comment deleted)
Hmm, the explanation of Allocators is much more detailed in the book, but I feel although more compact, it seems much more reasonable in the language reference. [0]

I'll keep exploring this book though, it does look very impressive.

0 - https://ziglang.org/documentation/master/#Memory

It's really hard to believe this isn't AI generated, but today I was trying to use the HTTP server from std after the 0.15 changes, couldn't figure out how it's supposed to work until I've searched repos in Github. LLM's couldn't figure it out as well, they were stuck in a loop of changing/breaking things even further until they arrived at the solution of using the deprecated way. so I guess this is actually handwritten which is amazing because it looks like the best resource I've seen up until now for Zig
It's pretty incredible how much ground this covers! However, the ordering feels a little confusing to me.

One example is in chapter 1. It talks about symbol exporting based on platform type, without explaining ELF. This is before talking about while loops.

It's had some interesting nuggets so far, and I've followed along since I'm familiar with some of the broad strokes, but I can see it being confusing to someone new to systems programming.

The book claims it’s not written with the help of AI, but the content seems so blatantly AI-generated that I’m not sure what to conclude, unless the author is the guy OpenAI trained GPT-5 on:

> Learning Zig is not just about adding a language to your resume. It is about fundamentally changing how you think about software.

“Not just X - Y” constructions.

> By Chapter 61, you will not just know Zig; you will understand it deeply enough to teach others, contribute to the ecosystem, and build systems that reflect your complete mastery.

More not just X - Y constructions with parallelism.

Even the “not made with AI” banner seems AI generated! Note the 3 item parallelism.

> The Zigbook intentionally contains no AI-generated content—it is hand-written, carefully curated, and continuously updated to reflect the latest language features and best practices.

I don’t have anything against AI generated content. I’m just confused what’s going on here!

EDIT: after scanning the contents of the book itself I don’t believe it’s AI generated - perhaps it’s just the intro?

EDIT again: no, I’ve swung back to the camp of mostly AI generated. I would believe it if you told me the author wrote it by hand and then used AI to trim the style, but “no AI” seems hard to believe. The flow charts in particular stand out like a sore thumb - they just don’t have the kind of content a human would put in flow charts.

I mean maybe the content is not AI generated (I wouldn’t say it is) but the website does have an AI generated smell to it. From the colors to the shapes, it looks like Sonnet or Opus definitely made some tweaks.
(comment deleted)
inb4 people start putting a standardized “not AI generated” symbol in website headers
> The Zigbook intentionally contains no AI-generated content—it is hand-written, carefully curated, and continuously updated to reflect the latest language features and best practices.

I think it's time to have a badge for non LLM content, and avoid the rest.

(comment deleted)

   The book content itself is deliberately free of AI-generated prose. Drafts may start anywhere, but final text should be reviewed, edited, and owned by a human contributor.
There is more specificity around AI use in the project README. There may have been LLMs used during drafting, which has led to the "hallmarks" sticking around that some commenters are pointing out.
But can we train AI on this beautifully hand-crafted material, and ask it later to rewrite Rust with Zig? :]
So many comments about the AI generation part. Why does it matter? If it’s good and accurate and helpful why do you care? That’s like saying you used a calculator to calculate your equations so I can’t trust you.

I am just impressed by the quality and details and approach of it all.

Nicely done (PS: I know nothing about systems programming and I have been writing code for 25 years)

An awful lot of commenters are convinced that it's AI-generated, despite explicit statements to the contrary. Maybe they're wrong, maybe they're right, but none of them currently have any proof stronger than vibes. It's like everyone has gaslit themselves into thinking that humans can't write well-structured neutral-tone docs any more.
I value human work and I do NOT value work that has been done with heavy AI usage. Most AI things I've seen are slop, I instantly recognize AI songs for example. I just dont want anything to do with it. The uniqueness of creative work is lost with using AI.
> Why does it matter?

I am just a human supremacist.

> Why does it matter? If it’s good and accurate and helpful why do you care? That’s like saying you used a calculator to calculate your equations so I can’t trust you.

Agree. What matters is quality, regardless of what/who made it.

O.t.o.h., it is funny to see tech people here, that work on implementing technology, taking an approach so... Luddite and "anti-tech".

If I wanted an AI book I would just prompt an LLM for it.
A lot of love went into this. It's evident throughout. Great job!
Why do we need another language?
This source is really hard to trust. AI or not, the author has done no work to really establish epistemological reliability and transparency. The entire book was published at once with no history, no evidence of the improvement and iteration it takes to create quality work, and no reference as to the creative process or collaborators or anything. And on top of that, the author does not seem to really have any other presence or history in the community. I love Zig, and have wanted more quality learning materials to exist. This, unfortunately, does not seem to be it.
>Learning Zig is not just about adding a language to your resume. It is about fundamentally changing how you think about software.

Zig is just C with a marketing push. Most developers already know C.

I would rephrase it as, Zig is just Modula-2 with a C like syntax.