"hates implicit behavior" and "lacks arity overloading" both sound refreshingly sane to me.
default arguments? I have to agree that one is hard to justify. It's not merely convenient but also does no harm that I can see, even specifically in the context of rust's special mandates. Then again it's also not a huge problem either, and maybe a good thing for rust's special goal, that you always have to supply default values when calling rather than when declaring.
Not knowing this person beyond this bit of text, I come away thinking I too would probably not want to adopt many of their ideas and would be another one of the many people they are "disappointed" by for that.
I do not buy their parting shot "... and I have the C++ committee to thank for this."
default arguments? I have to agree that one is hard to justify. It's not merely convenient but also does no harm that I can see, even specifically in the context of rust's special mandates. Then again it's also not a huge problem either, and maybe a good thing for rust's special goal, that you always have to supply default values when calling rather than when declaring.
Not knowing this person beyond this bit of text, I come away thinking I too would probably not want to adopt many of their ideas and would be another one of the many people they are "disappointed" by for that.
I do not buy their parting shot "... and I have the C++ committee to thank for this."