[kbenson]

The problem with people referring to more or less simple mental models, syntax, learning curves, expressiveness, etc is that they usually only focus on one of those at a time, when it requires multiple of them to get a good picture of how a language will work in practice for you, and in general.

As an extremely simple example of this, compare BASIC and APL in terms of the learning curve. If we examine it in isolation, BASIC is obviously better. But if we use multiple criteria, the answer becomes much more nuanced, as we can see what the steeper learning curve allows. For a less extreme, but still ultimately the same comparison, imagine Perl and Python, or Go and Rust. A simple mental model is important, but if one choice is less simple, the question should really be what are you getting in return, and is the trade-off worth it? Otherwise, you should just program in BASIC and be done it it.

[kibwen]

I would compare Rust to Python rather than Perl. Like Python, Rust tries to have only one obvious way to do things, and avoiding TIMTOWTDI is a conscious goal.

[kbenson]

I wasn't actually comparing Rust to either, I was using the common comparison of Perl to Python to illustrate the point. Perl is often denigrated for being hard to read, but I maintain that for the most part that's a function of experience with the language (learning curve). After you've internalized a few things, I think Perl is easier to read in many cases, because the sigils, which people often complain about, actually convey additional information in a succinct and recognizable way once you learn to read them correctly. It's what you get from having a steeper (or actually, longer, not really steeper) learning curve. But that's still not the full picture, as you've alluded to with TIMTOWDI, which is yet another spectrum on which languages can be compared.