Learning Rust

There's nothing wrong with long, detailed technical comments. One of the things that I love about the LWN comment section is that we will occasionally get real experts coming in and writing detailed responses to stuff. That's also why the comment submission form has no maximum length.

But valuable comments are usually written to directly address the comments or articles they're responding to — something that just inserting long quotes or lists of links to other resources pretty much cannot do. After all, you're responding to something written after the source you're quoting, in most cases.

Instead of quoting large sections of text, it is usually better to say something along the lines of "I disagree with [specific point X] because of [specific reason Y, stated in your own words]. In support of that, [here is a brief and narrowly targeted quote on the topic]."

Generally, when we say that comments should be "informative", that means they should be both information dense, and presented in a way that makes people more informed. Ideally, someone should be able to come to your comment, read it, and feel like they understand more than they did before. If they bounce off because of a lengthy quote, or because you're not responding directly to their previous points, that makes your comment less valuable even if the topic is otherwise interesting.

And this has exactly what to do with the price of tea in China?

Rust developers are writing theorem provers so they can move code out of "unsafe" into "safe". Are you saying they shouldn't be doing that?

That is why you're seen as trolling. You're treating other peoples' attempts to improve the language - which is what Rust expects of its developers - as evidence that Rust is not fit for purpose.

Cheers,
Wol