> You could write just the same kind of article about how Rust will bring out-of-touch theorists into modern software engineering where you actually need a C-le

> You could write just the same kind of article about how Rust will bring out-of-touch theorists into modern software engineering where you actually need a C-level of performance and predictability. Well the 'Motivation' section is about how low-level languages are a better (closer) fit to the contemporary machine architectures than functional programming. That could be interpreted to be dripping with attitude about functional programmers being out-of-touch with how machines 'really work'. (Which also seems to miss the point that functional programming languages that care about performance tries to achieve that by transforming idiomatic functional code to efficient imperative code, not trying to leverage some kind of machine model that actually matches the semantics of functional programming languages.) > And then show examples of all the same "for" loops with mutable variables that you're used to writing in C have direct analogs in Rust. Iterators seem to be more idiomatic in Rust than the loop alternatives.