sargas

How so?

This new logo looks sterile and boring, creativity-wise. It isn't clever neither. I'm excited for the official website redesign, however. It needs it.

That's really good information. I've stopped trusting Rotten Tomatoes not a long time ago. To be honest, I have stopped taking any "average" ratings for anything. At one point, I trusted those ratings for everything related to entertainment: movies, games, touristic places. But the truth is that the ones affected by reviews, that have power to influence it, will skew the perception, interpretation, and numbers of those reviews.

Neither it has been mine. I have written C and C++ only in college, so my impression might be very wrong, but I think that programmers who are proficient in low level languages are the ones that learn Rust the fastest due to the low level concepts Rust's compiler puts upfront such as sane memory management.

This is a bold statement, specially because not many other languages have such high quality guarantees at compile time.

> I already know it works

This is the part I don't agree all of the time, but depending on the scope and size of the project, I've seeing this be true. And the compiler is really good at catching regressions, submitting PRs for Rust projects is not easy in the beginning, but it is very hard to insert a regression.

That's your taste.

The semantics of Go are fine for the most part. My only problem with Go is manipulating slices. The rest is just awesome and it requires a lot of taste to simplify semantics without taking away the languages power.

And that's entirely possible.

And solve one problem by implanting another?

The fast/happiness graph of languages is pretty interesting.

Unrelated: Rust would probably be around the right-most area in the horizontal axis, close to C and C++, and a little below Go in the vertical axis.