Let mut x = 3;

Oh I'm willing. It's not like it's a problem I can't get past. I just find it stupid and unnecessary. I'm allowed to have opinions aren't I?

>I've been coding in C++ for over 15 years, why should I be forced to change my habits on account of a design committee?
Why do you have to switch to Rust, at the first place? It's not like you are forced to switch to it, you can write in C++ onwards.

That doesn't work if you're in a professional setting. No one asks you "do you know Rust?". You're a professional so they assume you know everything anyway.

I was like that on first, but I realized I need don't really need mutable in majority of cases.
Especially in things like pattern matching or references, writing const everywhere would be a nightmare.

It's not, but it inspires in functional programming which is really nice.

C++ is not provably correct(ie. free from undefined behavior), so it's not that needed there. It doesn't really matter if you use mutable reference in C++ instead of immutable, but doing so in Rust might make your code fail to compile.

let const xD (_) => { }

>Rust is not a functional language
Yet it's built over ideas from functional languages.
doc.rust-lang.org/reference/influences.html

>C++ is not provably correct
Neither is Rust. And C++ is orders of magnitude more powerful and expressive.

I think we should work on getting smarter rather than making our tools smarter. But that's just my philosophy.

I see value in Rust, but ultimately I don't find myself caring about any of the things it is supposed to bring to the table.

>>C++ is not provably correct
>Neither is Rust. And C++ is orders of magnitude more powerful and expressive.
C++ doesn't even have sum types so no

then do the job they pay you to do

No her but what is the actual use of sum types?
The way I see it it is just bad unclear design