> And you've entirely failed to address the largess of Rust, which, again, for a "systems language" is entirely mismatched. I'm not entirely sure where this id

> And you've entirely failed to address the largess of Rust, which, again, for a "systems language" is entirely mismatched. I'm not entirely sure where this idea even comes from. Why would it be desirable for a systems programming language to be sparse on features?