Lol. If you want to hamstring yourself by not utilizing powerful concepts, then go ahead, but don't thrust that onto others. The concept of moving a value is powerful and useful when designing APIs. You can use it to basically encode a finite state machine into your API, with the property that once a state is used for a transition, it can't be reused.
Rust is faster, more energy efficient and more RAM efficient than ruby. If that is not a real benefit to you personally then you should clarify that because there are far more exceptions than just real time systems.
Don't say Rust is useless.
Do say you don't need Rust.
Don't be so defensive, it is just a programming language.
> Don't say Rust is useless
Read it again. What I said was that the complexity added by the concept of ownership is not a worth the benefit of not having a garbage collector, except in a few cases.
I am not necessarily comparing it with Ruby. I am comparing it with languages equally fast, Go, OCaml, Haskell, that are garbage collected.
Instead of telling me what to say and not, why do you try to convince me that my argument is wrong. That's what this forum is about, no?
> With into_iter(), you take ownership over the vector. After the iteration, the vector will be gone. In Rust terminology, it will have moved.
I stopped reading right there. No Rubist or actually nobody, except real time system developers, should care about ownership.
It makes programming so much more complicated without any real benefit, again apart from real time systems.