> And in Rust? Well, let's see. Turns out monomorphization isn't all you need. Turns out that it is, in fact, occasionally useful to unify an object and its behavior in a runtime-polymorphic way. I expect yeet_expr to go through eventually too. Others are trying to stabilize (i.e. ossify) the notionally unstable ABI, just like they did to poor C++, which is now stuck with runtime pessimization because somebody is too lazy to recompile a binary from 2010.

Not to make an argument either way on your general point, but these are really bad examples for Rust if you look at the specifics:

Monomorphization was never the only option. Trait objects and vtables predate the RFC process itself. Early Rust wanted more dynamic dispatch than it eventually wound up with.

The idea of a "throw"-like operator was introduced at the same time as the `?` operator and `try` blocks: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/0243-trait-based-exception-... (Okay, technically `?` was proposed one month previously.)

All the various initiatives related to stable ABI are focused on opt-in mechanisms that work like `#[repr(C)]` and `extern "C"`.

The only way to interpret these as examples of "brash young project walks back its early stridency as it ages" is if you ignore the project's actual reasoning and design choices in favor of the popular lowest-common-denominator Reddit-comment-level understanding of those choices.