> I expect this sort of thing scales up as you are putting more in the type signature. Yep, I would agree with this. On my mental list of "stuff to blog about

> I expect this sort of thing scales up as you are putting more in the type signature. Yep, I would agree with this. On my mental list of "stuff to blog about someday" is a post along these lines. For me, most Rust code fits into a sort of sweet spot, with enough types to make things helpful, but not so many that it causes pain. Other people have different preferences and/or goals when it comes to these sorts of things. Incidentally, I was porting some Haskell code to Rust the other day, and ran into some of these differences. Oops, there's a lot more to this signature than I originally considered! This caused me to completely change the API of the code, given that what's natural for Haskell isn't always natural for Rust.