I think folks who write languages should have a typographer on their team because something like this:
use std::collections::HashMap
Is a typographic nightmare. While I understand “form follows function”, it’s tough to be excited to program in something like this.
I.e
use Std.String;
…. let string = String(…);
Dot is way better
:o)
It’s the difference that makes the difference between Rust-like and C++-like gibberish and poetry.
But that use statement is not a good example of it, and if that's the biggest criticism then Rust is faring fantastically well.
https://www.doverbooks.co.uk/point-and-line-to-plane
Consider h::i::j::k versus h.i.j.k
Two :’s is an extremely loud combination of visual elements compared to the subtle point. :: drags the eye away from the content and says “look at me oscillate”
In addition, humans group similar visual elements together so a combination of anything::doesnt::matter::what::between::clumps it is impossible to escape the common pattern and the eye jumps between the ::’s. Therefore it takes double the cognitive load to read.
What’s worse, the eye gets trapped within each :: because it’s a combination of four dots, which naturally creates an implied circular pattern which draws the viewer in further.
Compare to something like: use HashMap from std.collections
Or… more obviously the python import statements.
> Two :’s is an extremely loud combination of visual elements compared to the subtle point. :: drags the eye away from the content and says “look at me oscillate”
> In addition, humans group similar visual elements together so a combination of anything::doesnt::matter::what::between::clumps it is impossible to escape the common pattern and the eye jumps between the ::’s. Therefore it takes double the cognitive load to read.
It is true that the colons take up more space and your example looks good on HN.
But this problem will be immediately solved by syntax coloring. It's just never going to come up.
Rust is safe but it’s at least as ugly as C++.
Guido got a lot right with Python because it’s clean and easy to jump in. Minimal cognitive load. But still very powerful.
I'm curious, are you dyslexic? Seeing letters move is generally something that people with dyslexia complain about.
I feel like Rust has similar pitfalls in that vein—instead of defining the user experience first, they went for a symbol that is not used elsewhere—making it easier on the engineers while satisfying the “functional requirement” of namespaces.
So—Rust will not be the language-to-end-all-languages because it is not beautiful enough. Perhaps it is almost there in functionality, but i foresee a problem with any language’s longevity unless it’s literally perfectly thought-out user experience.
I’d love to jump on the hype train with Rust but it’s not really that exciting. It doesn’t really feel all that natural. Well-thought-out user experiences should feel natural through-and-through.