It's very common to see people with toxic attitudes in and around the Rust community, even in their internal communication about how to use Rust (`actix-web`, anyone?). I don't think it's helpful to lie to yourself about the Rust community like this.

The only thing Rust users who don't want to have these conversations can do is to openly recognize and talk about the extreme fanaticism Rust users commonly display and the toxic pattern of communication that sometimes is bundled or separate, when it comes to priorities in software dev.

I've seen more comments talking about this supposed phenomenon than instances of this phenomenon actually happening. I haven't really seen any examples of preaching and cult-like reactions, I just see people talking about how it supposedly exists somewhere.

I've found the complete opposite, Rust communities are the least hostile programming environments I've come across.

There's also a huge amount of irony about saying a community is toxic on this site

I don’t remember reading anything suggesting this, could you point out where you read this?

That's just not true.

Rust got already adopted by lot of either big or interesting to work at players (Amazon, Microsoft, DropBox, ...?) and, while anecdotal, I myself get also paid to program rust.

> the community is toxic. > In the rust community, just like a sect, everybody must say that everything is just perfect.

I often get the opposite feeling with all the diverse and lengthy discussions about how to do things, e.g., like getting async stable a few years ago or long blog articles of core contributors that state "we can do a lot better here and there" in public blog posts that get shared on /r/rust and don't get shunned.

Completely agree, but for a different reason:

The community and leadership is overran with woke leftist types. It's insufferable.

If you talk about something so undefined as _the Rust community_, I'm pretty sure I can claim that _someone of them_ has said pretty much anything in existence.

Like some of the "why did you not write it in Rust" bros on any forum like Reddit or here might very well have writen some utter bullshit about other languages, would not be surprised.

I think that it's a little unlikely that the Rust community is mostly composed of "amateurs and unemployable extremists" - a lot of the working software engineers I know are interested in or actively use it.

However, "assuming they're identical and them swiftly demonizing anyone that dissents" is an excellent characterization of, at least, the parts of the Rust community that I see on HN and Reddit.

Does this, to you, look like a response that is welcoming to C++ devs? I gave careful and impassive reasons, and you strike back with literal ad hominem attacks.

This sort of reply is what makes Rust, as a community, look shallow-minded and toxic.

I think I speak for a majority of the Rust community when I say that we're embarrassed by this sort of behavior and we desperately wish that folks would stop it.

They do do a pretty damn good job of giving people this impression.

At least in the quoted sections, they weren’t talking about the opinions of the rust community, but rather those of someone from the Rust community.

This is the second time I've seen someone say this in the last week or so, but I've never seen this claim in the wild, and it's never been a secret that Rust's memory management is heavily influenced by Cyclone. Can you show an example of someone making this claim?

I'd say even if many of technical claims about Rust are true. It still seems very much like a cult.

This implies that Rust doesn't have any problems, which is...crazy.

In addition to the problematic community, just rearchitecting your code to fit around the borrow checker can be a massive amount of work, which already makes it infeasible for use in some places where the primary work is not on greenfield projects but on legacy code.

> Unfortunately theres an old guard that refuses to let up and invest in rust.

...and this is just emotionally manipulative, in addition to incredibly dishonest about the problems that Rust actually has.

I honestly haven't found this to be the case. There is a constant denial that some people might find Rust difficult (with a very strong implication that if they do, it's because of inferiority on their part), and extreme thin-skinnedness towards even the possibility that Rust might not be for everyone. Indeed, a bluff assertion that it is for everyone is part of its official tagline. The community keeps up a surface politeness, but it always looks to me that it achieves this by keeping a tight lid on dissent (or appearance thereof).

You mentioned Reddit. Rust's subreddit had at the time over 80k subscribers. The subreddit massively piled on the maintainer of Actix. This harassment campaign was so massive that core Rust members felt obligated to write public declarations how Rust should invest in community building and, with the Actix case as an example, whether they could actually reject contempt culture.

It was not an isolated bad apple. Rust's community is renowned for being toxic, hostile and abbrasive. This topic is underlined time and again even in HN. It's not possible to hide this fact.

I have yet to find a community that has gotten popular and hasn't turned into a sewage plant. I think it's just a reflection on what the general population is like... :(

I mean I saw it on Reddit, guy got panned for abusing unsafe and bunch of unsafe were patched out. That's it as far as what I am aware of.

> Rust community put up a relentless harrasment campaign targeting

Don't judge community (especially one you don't know) by their worst member.

Rust community didn't all agree and made a pact to harass/dox that guy. Few assholes did.

Trying to generalize this behavior to entirety of Rust community is disingenuous. Imagine if I started saying all programmers were wife killers, because some programmers killed their wifes.