> (NO WAY is C++ harder to learn than Rust) Depends on what you mean. Writing good, safe, C++? Quite hard. Debatably harder than Rust, but it's debatable, not

> (NO WAY is C++ harder to learn than Rust) Depends on what you mean. Writing good, safe, C++? Quite hard. Debatably harder than Rust, but it's debatable, not an absolute statement. The difference is that C and C++ let you write things like doubly linked lists in day 1 of learning them, whereas Rust won't. But a good doubly linked list is tricky to get right anyway. I learned C++ first too, and I think I have a handle on "safe" C++ practices, but it's mostly a nebulous set of conventions that shift in the particulars based on the codebase. OTOH in Rust I'm immensely productive even in random codebases. Most of the cognitive overhead of Rust exists in C++ too, since you still need to reason about how your data is shared, just that C++ spreads the cost out over the learning curve, whereas in Rust you have to deal with it up front.