I find neither C++ nor Rust to be particularly “creative” programming languages because one has to think all the time about two things which are irrelevant for the features of the program - resource management and complicated types.
Rust is even worse than C++ because it highly encourages encoding logic in types and the community loves doing that.
You seem to have almost come to the same conclusion yourself, but then mistakenly assume that the same kind of productivity of a GC language is available in a system language. Nope. Although at least in C++ one can just say “fuck it” during the “creative” prototyping phase, copy most things and still have decent syntax and performance. In Rust you’d have to pepper everything with clone, boxes and (a)rc, so you'd have another mess.
Rust is even worse than C++ because it highly encourages encoding logic in types and the community loves doing that.
You seem to have almost come to the same conclusion yourself, but then mistakenly assume that the same kind of productivity of a GC language is available in a system language. Nope. Although at least in C++ one can just say “fuck it” during the “creative” prototyping phase, copy most things and still have decent syntax and performance. In Rust you’d have to pepper everything with clone, boxes and (a)rc, so you'd have another mess.