So are you talking about error messages or about complexity of borrow-checker? Because I can agree about borrow-checker, but not about error messages (although there is a lot of noise, yes).
Er… both? In separate sections of the comment?
> Because I can [not agree] about error messages
I've provided a clear example of an issue, are you denying objective reality or are you asserting that providing incorrect suggestions leading beginners in entirely the wrong direction is fine?
Now what the hell are you talking about?
I didn't reply to your comment I replied to valarauca1, they're the one who mentioned the borrow checker, if you're unhappy about that whine to them don't include me in your pity party.
"And while many Rust messages are OK, one should be careful not to confuse familiarity with Rust's error messages[0] with Rust's error messages being good (being inherently informative and good)."
So you will still try to pretend we are not talking about error messages here?
I'd appreciate you not insulting me, as well as you starting to make sense.
> You are responding to the branch my comment started
I was not, however, replying to your comment. As I already told you I was replying to valarauca1's comment, which is why my own comment was threaded below and in reply to it, and quoted it.
> So you will still try to pretend we are not talking about error messages here?
I'll repeat my previous query in a new context and with slightly more alarm: what the hell are you talking about?
I never "tried to pretend"[0] we were not talking about error messages, my answer[1] to your original query[2] specifically noted the opposite.
[0] and would again appreciate not being insulted