Your response seemed to fall into a category common amongst Rust enthusiasts, which is to assume anyone resistant to the lure is ipso facto lazy or misguided. Your own question was a hint at laziness. I have no idea how much effort the writer put into evaluating Rust. I doubt you do either.
I don't know why some of us find Rust difficult. Perhaps it just is, or isn't, or is for some people and not for others, or perhaps we are just thick. My suspicion is that there are more people who do than seem apparent, because they tend to get shut down by the very decorous implications of laziness or stupidity that are so characteristic of the Rust community.
Well I didn't see another way to gloss your question:
> would it really be too expensive to invest some time to learn it?
I'm entirely happy to take your word that I've misinterpreted the question. Back-and-forth in comments about intended meaning is rarely useful. So my apologies.
But the general attitude in the Rust community (of which I have no idea whether or not you're a part) absolutely is "Rust is not hard, and if you find it so, that's a measure of your dysfunction, not a description of the language".
The context for that question is important: OP had a set of requirements and Rust seemed to meet them. I’d personally consider investing time to learn technology X if I found out it met my requirements. This is not a Rust-specific thing.
I agree that Rust is not simple to learn. There is a definite learning curve involved, especially at the start. I hope your experience with the community and the language improves going forward.
I don't know why some of us find Rust difficult. Perhaps it just is, or isn't, or is for some people and not for others, or perhaps we are just thick. My suspicion is that there are more people who do than seem apparent, because they tend to get shut down by the very decorous implications of laziness or stupidity that are so characteristic of the Rust community.