I use Rust both professionally for parsing large datasets and image processing, and on most of my personal projects. I'm probably a little biased, since I both

I use Rust both professionally for parsing large datasets and image processing, and on most of my personal projects. I'm probably a little biased, since I both aesthetically like how Rust "feels" and that a lot of how it deals with the complexity of computers fits well with my own mental map of how computers work. Whether that's a chicken or the egg situation is up for debate... That said, I think a counter argument here comes back to they complexity budget. I don't feel like language design and borrow checker are inherently more complex, but rather that they explicitly pull out that complexity, but in a way that feels manageable. I know that that since writing more Rust, my code written in other languages like C++ or even Python have started started having patterns that I picked up from my work in Rust, and that I qualitatively feel like that has raised my code quality in those languages. I'm also definitely more aware of some of the hidden complexity in certain tasks like dealing with system paths. So at least in some degree of summary: no. I like the level of abstraction and complexity Rust has, and the mechanisms in place for dealing with that complexity have largely seemed both well thought-out and implemented such that they are accessible to a mainstream audience.