Go and Rust have different idioms and syntax. But they occupy broadly similar paradigms.
For example, you don’t need to relearn how to do iteration like you would with a logic or pure functional language. You wouldn’t need to concepts like methods, like you would if you were coming from a stack based language. Etc
I think this comment weasels around the intent of the poster without acknowledging their meaning.
Go and rust have very little in common. If you consider them to be the same paradigm that's fine. But I don't think most people would as rust leans more functional.
“Leaning into functional” isn’t a hard thing to learn. However pure functional is when coming from an imperative language.
And that’s the point I was always making. Rust takes inspiration from different languages than Go. But there is a huge amount of borrowed experience you can lean on when switching between Go and Rust. You’re not starting from scratch.
Perhaps the real problem here is that developers stick to a subset of similar imperative languages and then moan that minor differences are hard to reason about?
Ok, but still they share some programming language paradigm, but not all. They both are imperative, concurrent and functional, but Rust is generic, Go is not. Rust is structured, Go is OO.
Go and Rust have different idioms and syntax. But they occupy broadly similar paradigms.
For example, you don’t need to relearn how to do iteration like you would with a logic or pure functional language. You wouldn’t need to concepts like methods, like you would if you were coming from a stack based language. Etc