I'll definitely say that. It's my biggest problem with the language. Type variable declaration lists, pub keyword instead of export lists, macros instead of functors, out-of-line method declaration, special keywords and symbols all over the place that could have just been built-in type constructors, module accessor is the horrible ::, which synergies with a weird decision to nest modules extensively so that code is even noisier.
Rust is a very ugly language to me. Ugly enough that while I like many aspects of its semantic design, I will never use it personally. I would rate it to be about as ugly as Ada, just for different reasons.
Sure. You can call anything ugly. I got in trouble with Walton because I said the borrow checker should be an external tool for C++. With the exception of Lisp, which is $DEITY's own language, all languages have problems. There are aspects of Rust that I like more than C++ (traits vs. classes, for instance.)
The main difference here is I won't down-vote you because you say you don't like Rust.
I think Rust has a lot of nice things about it, semantically. I think sepples is extremely ugly too. I didn't downvote you though, I don't even know how to do that on HN.
I'll definitely say that. It's my biggest problem with the language. Type variable declaration lists, pub keyword instead of export lists, macros instead of functors, out-of-line method declaration, special keywords and symbols all over the place that could have just been built-in type constructors, module accessor is the horrible ::, which synergies with a weird decision to nest modules extensively so that code is even noisier.
Rust is a very ugly language to me. Ugly enough that while I like many aspects of its semantic design, I will never use it personally. I would rate it to be about as ugly as Ada, just for different reasons.