>C++, D, and Ruby are "MIT school" languages. What are you basing that on? C++ is a "lets add everything and let the user sort it out" language, how is that i

>C++, D, and Ruby are "MIT school" languages. What are you basing that on? C++ is a "lets add everything and let the user sort it out" language, how is that in line with the principles of the "MIT school"? Ruby is literally perl--, how is that MIT school? Because rails does incredibly dumb stuff like incorrectly pluralizing table names by default? That's not MIT school, it is just dumb. >and I assume that Rust is in the MIT school. I can't imagine any way to rationalize that idea. Rust is at its core all about trade-offs and "good enough"s. It is supposed to be a better systems language, not an ideal language. I can see claiming scheme, or SML or haskell or clean are "MIT school". Basically any language people spread FUD about being "not practical". But rust is explicitly intended to appeal to the people who pretend good languages are not practical.