That said, the code is usually there for a good reason and I'm extremely thankful for it in the instances where things are refactored and the compiler catches it, or some deviation from the norm comes up and the scaffold allows for doing things the way you need.
Are you using an MVC web framework, or something like that? Asking because I'm curious about other people's experience with Rust.
Writing code without dependencies/frameworks that have a required structure is a joy, however.
Not that I think that's a bad thing. I prefer it to "magic" (I never got on with Rails because of this... what just happened? why did it do that? where does it say it should do that?).
And you never know when you have a class/use case that needs the boilerplate to change. Having it the same 99% of the time so that you have the option to change it for that 1% edge case is a good thing, imho.
With Spring you get to ask all these questions...with all the boilerplate of Java as an added bonus!
That said, I think OOP education focused a lot on inheritance during Java's rise and that was mostly a mistake in hindsight.
Maybe if you compare to Java from 10y ago. Have you ever tried to print a map in an alphabetical order of its keys?
The only thing more verbose in Java are getters/setters which hopefully will disappear once records are available.