Here’s another way to frame the original argument: A less performant solution in a subset of Rust will still be miles ahead of optimized Python or Ruby, while

Here’s another way to frame the original argument: A less performant solution in a subset of Rust will still be miles ahead of optimized Python or Ruby, while being as readable. An equivalent C++ solution on the other hand could be less readable and unsafe. Also, limited use of borrowers is not that hard to grasp. Mutable references however make my head hurt. More so when they’re used by someone who doesn’t understand their purpose well. One mutable reference passed down a chain of functions is okay (like a shared context/state object/db connection/etc), but more than a few make my head hurt. You can still make logical mistakes with shared context, so in general - more pure functions = easier to spot logical mistakes (as most mutations will be concentrated in one place). And this is a general rule applicable to all programming languages.