> There are no reasons why one should not produce a good design in a any language. Certain languages give you better tools than others in terms of reaching a g

> There are no reasons why one should not produce a good design in a any language. Certain languages give you better tools than others in terms of reaching a good design. Go for instance puts you in a bit of a "jail" in terms of complexity which prevents you from going too far off the rails. Rust uses a strict compiler to categorically prevent whole classes of issues. So yes in some sense bad code is a "people problem" but the right tools can go a long way to mitigate it. > Rust may be faster to read, but you can hit some very rough patch and serious head scratchers. I think this is where Rust's type system can often be a double-edged sword. I have run into more than a few libraries which try to make things "simple" to use by leveraging traits solve problems in a somewhat magical way, but in my experience this often makes it very difficult to trace what's actually going on. I find that Rust code is not all that self documenting, and it relies heavily on documentation in order to be understandable. And quite a few libraries are strong on per-item, per-function documentation but there's a gap in terms of high-level docs explaining the intended use of the library.