> it takes longer to learn the basics of Rust compared to C++.
Does it really? For example I'd think that initialization of objects is a topic that should be in "basics", yet initialization of objects in C++ seems disproportionately complex compared to Rust (at least to me).
Yet, object initialization is not a thing anyone needs to pay much attention to. Yes, there are historical rabbit holes, but you need not go down them.
Does it really? For example I'd think that initialization of objects is a topic that should be in "basics", yet initialization of objects in C++ seems disproportionately complex compared to Rust (at least to me).