Re: Rust is a waste of duplicated effort (Score 1)

I find the inlay hints extremely annoying and always turn them off. If I need to know the type of something, hovering works. I also think that inlay hints shouldn't be relied on, and it's sometimes good to add your own annotations. For example, no problem IMO with `let s = "something";` because there's no doubt that it's a `&str`, or `vec![0u8, 1, 2, 3, 4]` being a `Vec`. Same for `let food = 8u16;` (I don't like that the analyzer adds the redundanct `: u16` here, but at least it's consistent), and for reassignments `let x: u16 = 0; let y = x`. However: if you have `let foo = bar();` and the return type isn't explicit from `bar()`, I think it's good practice to add a type annotation - same for anywhere it's not obvious. It just makes it easier to understand your code without a language server (github, barebones vim, etc). Re: the type noise. I think a lot of this comes from generics. If your struct takes a generic, it's not impossible to have something like `Option>>`. Which on one hand is noisy and long to type. But on the other hand 1. it's crystal clear what it's representing - there's no misunderstanding the nesting 2. you can always `type MyType = Option` to typedef it away if you use it often enough 3. You don't need to type it everywhere where if it's obvious, following my guidelines from above 4. There's nothing in C to compare this to since there are no generics TL;DR, I think there's a happy medium with "it's needed, type it out" "it's obvious, code readers can figure it out", and "it's not obvious, give code readers a hint", and I appreciate all three being options