> I think I hit a nerve with this one. It does tend to grate on people when you have developers from a certain community going and calling anybody that doesn't

> I think I hit a nerve with this one. It does tend to grate on people when you have developers from a certain community going and calling anybody that doesn't agree with their "One True Way" inferior and not loving their craft. This is literally the No True Scotsman fallacy to a tee. You're essentially saying, "Only a true programmer that loves their craft would use Rust. Clearly if you're not using Rust, you're not a true programmer". Yeah, sure. I'll say this for the millionth time, I've seen great code in C++, I've seen terrible code in C++. I've seen great code in Python, I've seen terrible code in Python. I've seen great code in Typescript, I've seen terrible code in Typescript. I personally don't look at Rust code, but I'm willing to bet that there's great Rust code, and terrible Rust code. It turns out, the language is not the variable in this equation, it's the developer. > That's my personal experience, I don't have hard data to back it up. So, statistically speaking, you're making this up out of thin air. > That you can find an exception doesn't disprove the rule. You still have to treat people as individuals, and not as a population. That should go without saying. Exactly, which is why saying something like: >> People learn C++ in college. People learn Rust because they love their craft. Is such a radical statement. I don't see people from other programming language communities talk like this. It's amazing to me that people from the Rust community think saying things like, "If you don't learn Rust, it must be because you don't love your craft" is a verifiable fact. I know it's a crazy thought to have, but maybe, just maybe, people can like different things...?