LOL. People raked C++ over the coals for having metaprogramming sophisticated enough to need debugging. People mocked projects like Templight (https://llvm.org/devmtg/2015-04/slides/EuroLLVM2015Templight...) as just providing how awful C++ is. Now, when the same thing appears for Rust, it's evidence of how awesome Rust is?
I used to write C++ for around 10 years. I get the point you're trying to make... Like, both languages sometimes produce errors so long as to seem unhelpful (although the Rust error in this post is actually immediately helpful, so maybe it was a poor example on their part).
However, comparing Rust traits to template programming seems a bit disingenuous. One is literally a templating engine (albeit powerful one that people got creative with) and the other is part of a fairly cohesive type system (even if it has some downsides).
Also, I think even the most obtuse errors in Rust are still more helpful than average C++ template error.
