> no other wide open implementation (like Rust has) So (at least according to pjmlp in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42548360 https://news.ycombinator.c

> no other wide open implementation (like Rust has) So (at least according to pjmlp in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42548360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42548360) Rust also only has a single "wide open" implementation. Which means Rust doesn't have any "other" open implementation either, right? Honestly, it's hard to know what of all the pro-Rust stuff one sees (here and elsewhere on-line) to take seriously, when its advocates constantly -- consciously or not -- exaggerate its virtues like this.