I exaggerated for effect. I am sorry, and I apologize. Being a long time Rust user, it is annoying to read "why doesn't Rust do X instead of Y?", insinuating X

I exaggerated for effect. I am sorry, and I apologize. Being a long time Rust user, it is annoying to read "why doesn't Rust do X instead of Y?", insinuating X is clearly better than Y and they can't believe why Rust developers haven't considered the obvious alternative. Because it is very frequently (estimate: >50%) the case that Rust did do X, and changed to Y only after lots of actual experience and deliberation. For most design decisions people complain about Rust, Rust tried them both ways. In a few cases, changes were reverted after trying both ways, but usually changes stuck, because they were made carefully.