Comment by Inityx

> Rust has a dogmatic, aggressive and self-righteous community that uses any available tactic to push their language through.

I'm confused, because that's not been my experience of the rust community at all. I've been very critical of certain aspects of rust over the last few years, and I've (for the most part) gotten fair, reasonable feedback in response.

> The Rust literature is poorly written compared to C and Ada

I'm even more confused. Which literature are you looking at? Can you provide some examples so we’re all talking about the same thing?

I find most of the documentation around rust to be the best in the business. Eg here's the reference documentation for iterator trait, in the standard library:

https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/iter/trait.Iterator.html

Every function in that interface is well documented, with examples.

Here's the equivalent for C++:

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/iterator/iterator.html

Where is the rest of it? This doesn't describe how iterators work at all. Or how to use them. There's more stuff in the header file but its inadequate by far.

So much C library code is documented in ad-hoc ways - often through doxygen, which is a disaster. Eg here's the documentation for LMDB. LMDB is one of the most thoroughly documented C APIs I've seen, but I find this almost totally unusable. I often find myself reading the source instead. There's not even any links to the source from here:

http://www.lmdb.tech/doc/group__mdb.html

In rust, any published crate automatically has a docs.rs/cratename link. Eg for serde's reference manual:

https://docs.rs/serde/

And then for the "guide" style explanation they wrote a book:

https://serde.rs/

Where is any documentation for the C standard library? As far as I can tell, there's no official documentation at all. There are man pages. But in comparison to rust's docs, or mdn for javascript, man pages are nowhere near as good. I’d give examples but this comment is too long already.