| > Perhaps the pool of people with 15-20 years that are still doing programming is very small I'm at 20 years of paid, professional coding, and 30+ if you count my Apple IIe/gs days and fooling around with C++ as an undergrad. It took me about a week or two to make friends with the borrow checker, and mostly those were self-inflicted wounds from trying to write aggressive zero-copy code. I think that Rust works very well for certain coding styles, but the learning curve is much higher for other coding styles. If you've been scarred by C++ and you're used to treating variables as mostly immutable, the learning curve is pretty reasonable. But if you work in a style with a lot of mutability and you've never wrested with "const char *" versus "std::string" in C++ (which both exist for a good reason in C++), there's more to learn. So I could legitimately see it go either way. My handy litmus test: Do you utterly despise C++, or do you have a complicated love-hate relationship with it? If you fall in the latter group, you may fall in love with Rust on the first try. If you've never even used C++ enough to have an opinion, then it's possible you might not care about high-performance static languages and the prices they pay to go fast, and so Rust's trade-offs might not even be interesting to you. |
[0] Unless that something is Rails templating because dang, that is some crazypants there.