I read the article only not to be able to to find any meaningful notes. I did not expect versus so I support the writer that it's weak point to compare on the v

I read the article only not to be able to to find any meaningful notes. I did not expect versus so I support the writer that it's weak point to compare on the versus basis, but still as a person who actively maintains C++ experience since 1996 and been through Borland, Watcom, Visual C, old standards, C++11, C++14, and tries to follow isocpp.org standard discussions to understand where C++ is heading as standard and still use clang, cl and gcc regularly and.. I have zero experience in RUST, I only heard from many seasoned C++ developers that this platform comes with significant value proposition. I had no chance to meet it yet, nor I have currently time to experiment, thus I was curious about the article to help me understand the differences. The only thing I remembered from the article is that compiler error messaging are different in the two and more clearly defined in RUST. Plus classical anti C++ example => memory management. C#, Java already addressed that, so I expect RUST has something more unique than that. Can somebody point to better article that shows some practical appliances why to switch to RUST if you have significant C++ experience? Not that I want to bitch the author. Nice try explaining something, bue you know fixing error messages in C++ code was never a random staring at the code in my case.