[unshavedyak]

The rope in my example is complexity. Ie choosing to use "all teh features" when you don't need or perhaps even want to. Eg sometimes a simple clone is fine. Sometimes you don't need to opt for every generic and performance minded feature Rust offers - which are numerous.

Though, i think my statement is missing something. I moved from Go to Rust because i found that Rust gave me better tooling to encapsulate and reuse logic. Eg Iterators are more complex under the hood, but my observed complexity was lower in Rust compared to Go by way of better, more generalized code reuse. So in this example i actually found Go to be more complex.

So maybe a more elaborated phrase would be something like Rust gives you more visible rope to hang yourself with.. but that doesn't sound as nice. I still like my original phrase heh.

[1313ed01]

I would love to see a language that is to C what Rust is to C++. Something a more average human brain like mine can understand. Keep the no-gc memory safety things, but simplify everything else a thousand times.

Not saying that should replace Rust. Both could exist side by side like C and C++.

[wtetzner]

I'm curious about what you'd want simplified. Remove traits? What other things are there to even simplify if you're going to keep the borrow checker?