Comments by "Anony Mousse" (@anon_y_mousse) on "My Experience with Rust as a Java Dev" video.

I would suggest that you learn C instead. The compiler doesn't hold your hand, but if you really need that at this point in your career, there are plenty of tools to use. Personally, the more I learn of Rust, the more I hate it. Things like unbox and clone are as much anti-patterns as move is in C++. The more clear syntax for handling an error return where you're maybe receiving something is to merely test it with: if ( obj ) do_something here(); else do_something_else(); Or if a quick exit on failure would make more sense, and it often does, then: if ( !obj ) { print_error(); return error_code; }; Of course, if you still feel the need to have OO design patterns with language support for them, C++ is still the better choice over Rust, even if r- and l- value references have muddied things up.
3
@glebzenkov396 So you say, yet every example I see shows off using match and its convoluted garbage syntax to demonstrate handling errors. I don't even like that syntax for handling enums, but when you've only got two possibilities it's worse. I won't argue for inheritance, but I personally prefer the way that C++ does all the rest over Rust. It has a cleaner syntax that's far more regular. Honestly, I didn't think I could hate a syntax more than C++'s until Rust came about.
1
@RustIsWinning Cleaner in that it's a more regular syntax that's easier to parse for a machine, if not read for a human.
1