[jfager]

It's a matter of taste. I personally feel that your specific examples make Rust more readable, because of how little space gets wasted on those frequent, unambiguous names. Ubiquitous boilerplete-ish things that show up everywhere should recede a bit, imo; let me spend my line width budget on what's unique and important about my code.

But again, it's just a matter of taste and not really worth wasting a lot of time worrying about. The important thing about Rust is its semantics (speed, safety, control), not its syntax.

[bjz_]

> The important thing about Rust is its semantics (speed, safety, control), not its syntax.

Agreed. I love Haskell syntax above all else, but I like Rust's semantics too much to let that get in the way of me using it.

[shmerl]

Sure, I didn't want to sound dismissive, I'm very interested in Rust semantics.