Eh, eye of the beholder. The stronger type system and more verbose syntax certainly makes the code look different. In a way though, it makes the code much more readable. To pick on Python, the Rust code is a lot more _specific_ in what it is going to do, I like that when I am maintaining a code base, it is easier to work on and understand. They are also targeting totally different use cases, so I understand differences of opinion depending on what kind of problem you are trying to solve.

I had the opposite opinion.

It looks like the best mix of abstractions like first-class Result, Option, Future, and Trait with some of the best performance.

In Go, I write twice as much code for code that's slower than Rust. I can't even reuse code without copy and paste. Python and Clojure don't even have Rust features. Python doesn't even have .map. Go is barely statically-typed (bet you're gonna use interface{} implementing this too), Python and Clojure aren't at all -- so that's also going to be a source of gut-reaction "whoa this must be complex".

The code looks very pleasing to me.

As I python dev I feel kinda the opposite: rust is surprisingly pretty with the exception of massive overuse of shift key to the point where I'd consider it a health hazard.

The only other low-level language that is pretty that I found is nim.

A matter of perspective IMO. Before I learned Rust it looked messy but now that I know it I don’t think that at all. In fact the way you can use match statements and Result<T> structs make it quite beautiful to me.

as a fan of clojure you must be familiar with how people dismiss lisps because of the parens.

some of the complexity of Rust is just necessary to get C speed with memory safety, some is just not being used to the “parens”