I don't know about Ruby, but saying Scala and Rust put everything into the language is just totally incorrect. Both are designed with philosophy of building min

I don't know about Ruby, but saying Scala and Rust put everything into the language is just totally incorrect. Both are designed with philosophy of building minimal set of features with very strong expressivity. For example Scala 3 removed a lot from the language and unified many features. As for Rust. Is there inheritance in Rust? No. Overloading? No. Global or static (like Java static) variables? No. GC? No. Exceptions as the main error handling feature? No. N ways of casting to a different type? No. 5 or 6 ways of building dataclasses like in Python? No. 20 ways of packaging / building a project? Again - nope. I think this is already enough to say they didn't put everything into the language, and they are actually very careful not to introduce unnecessary features. Actually I find Rust quite small, compared to e.g. Java or C++, but it has much better expressivity.