[anon-3988]

Rust is just a tool. A decent tool that I think can be made better (by removing stuff and stop adding more stuff to the surface syntax). So I am down to criticize Rust.

However, I also don't understand how people don't see the usefulness of what Rust put to the mainstream: algebraic data types, sum types, traits, etc.

I also get super annoyed when people think Rust is only chosen for "safety". Says frustrating things like "so I can just use unsafe", because no you don't and if you do I would reject your changes immediately.

Honestly, in general, I am just annoyed when people don't use the right tool for the right job. And attempts to fix the tool with more bespoke stuff on top it.

[aldanor]

Yes. To me personally, Rust and both its restrictions and features (ie no OOP and prevalence of sum types and hence other goodies) makes approaching the implementation of big problems differently; eventually the experience with Rust also changes (to some extent) the way you write and structure the code in other languages. One might argue that Rust is not unique here and this would also apply to languages like ocaml etc - sure, perhaps; but I can't write in any of those languages at work on daily basis since they don't fit performance-wise or for many other reasons.

[HippoBaro]

> Says frustrating things like "so I can just use unsafe", because no you don't and if you do I would reject your changes immediately.

This is the kind of hostility (which is frankly toxic) that’s become associated with parts of the Rust community, and has fairly or not, driven away many talented people over time.

[iknowstuff]

There is no hostility on display there lol just an entirely reasonable code quality standard