I've been learning Rust for a little while, and while I agree that it can be frustrating, it's nowhere near as bad as trying to learn Haskell. I regularly get a friend of mine to explain things to me, because the documentation and community for Haskell are 90% incomprehensible to anyone who doesn't have a comp-sci degree or a higher education in mathematics. Example: https://wiki.haskell.org/Lifting. It's not that I don't get the concept (after being given a much better explanation), it's just that the Haskell community in particular really seems to struggle with communication. And I think that's where Rust is actually in a good place for learning.
Rust has some confusing concepts, and it does feel like you're fighting the compiler sometimes, but I can see what it's trying to achieve and it's improving very rapidly. I find that I can more-or-less stumble my way through it until I get where I want, as the documentation that is about is generally well-written, even if it doesn't cover everything yet :)
Yeah that bit was alright, it was everything after that I struggled with ;)
As an example; I don't know what a functor is. I've not come across that term in anything I've done before, so I click on it to read up and get the definition: "The Functor typeclass represents the mathematical functor: a mapping between categories in the context of category theory. In practice a functor represents a type that can be mapped over.", which uh, doesn't really help. I only did mathematics to GCSE level here in the UK, during which I never came across most of the terms used frequently in Haskell's documentation :D
There's a lack of examples of "real-world" usage in Haskell. e.g. here's how you'd use lifting, in a practical example. e.g. why is lifting a thing and what possible uses does it have when writing an application? Because to my knowledge I've never done it before, so why is it good?
Thankfully my friend sent me this: http://adit.io/posts/2013-04-17-functors,_applicatives,_and_..., which is a much better explanation. It's probably due to a difference in my background (predominantly web, applications, self-taught etc) and the more academic history of Haskell, but I find the vast majority of examples irrelevant. Luckily there are a -few- books/tutorials around that explain the language more clearly and why I might want to write software with it.
It's a shame because it looks like a really cool language, but it is seriously hard to get into. Whereas with Rust, it just kinda makes sense to me.
I did mathematics to first year university level and didn't come across any of the terms used in Haskells.
Our programmers group is currently working through category theory with - https://bartoszmilewski.com/2014/10/28/category-theory-for-p... - and a lot of it is utterly bewildering, but at least I am starting to understand some of what Haskell is going on about. As for real world usage, however, I still have a long way to go...
Rust has some confusing concepts, and it does feel like you're fighting the compiler sometimes, but I can see what it's trying to achieve and it's improving very rapidly. I find that I can more-or-less stumble my way through it until I get where I want, as the documentation that is about is generally well-written, even if it doesn't cover everything yet :)
And it's kinda fun!