> The first part is true to I do not know how many languages, the second part is subjective And it's fine that way. There are lots of languages out there, and

> The first part is true to I do not know how many languages, the second part is subjective And it's fine that way. There are lots of languages out there, and very few of them have any objective problem-solving features to justify their existence. Tackling some problem in a new way like Rust does (arguable, see prior art like Cyclone) is the exception, not the norm. Lots of languages are about improving subjective ergonomy while combining and tweaking features already found in other languages. Would it be fine to state that the language solves nothing for you and you can stop reading? But I don't think that needs to be stated any more than the post already did. Then the rest of the readers, who have an ounce of curiosity left in them, can scroll on and take the time to appreciate the design and see if they like where it's headed.