> I feel like it corresponds to the highly rigorous thought that has gone into the language

I'd say it's less about rigorous thought, and more about being willing to spend time on purely user-centric things.

You can have both of course, but surely things like proof assistants have a lot of rigorous thought put into them, yet the error reporting is usually horrendous.

Improvements to Rust's error reporting is the result of a specific and dedicated effort in that direction: https://blog.rust-lang.org/2016/08/10/Shape-of-errors-to-com... (and https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/new-error-format/3438 and https://web.archive.org/web/20160807033841/http://www.jonath...).

And note that the new errors didn't really provide more information (at least initially), instead they formatted the information better, removed redundancies and noise, and called out the relevant bits more clearly. This runs very much opposite of "rigorously" dumping all the stuff you have and letting the user sort it out.