People have become not just better at structuring projects, but also at writing standard libs and programming languages.
Many features gained a lot of adoption accross languages over the last two decades, like anonymous functions (with convinient arrow syntax), explicit option types instead of implicit null/undefined, match constructs, well-integrated library management, for(each) loops using iterators instead of indices, map/reduce functional iterators, etc. Rust has the advantage of being able to make these core parts of the language and standard library, resulting in an overall more expressive language.
And in rust's view these features should not only be used to make coding more convinient, but also to encode intent and make undesirable things impossible. This is reflected in the standard library (for example it's impossible to access the data protected by a mutex without locking it), and the philosophy is copied by the ecosystem.
Many features gained a lot of adoption accross languages over the last two decades, like anonymous functions (with convinient arrow syntax), explicit option types instead of implicit null/undefined, match constructs, well-integrated library management, for(each) loops using iterators instead of indices, map/reduce functional iterators, etc. Rust has the advantage of being able to make these core parts of the language and standard library, resulting in an overall more expressive language.
And in rust's view these features should not only be used to make coding more convinient, but also to encode intent and make undesirable things impossible. This is reflected in the standard library (for example it's impossible to access the data protected by a mutex without locking it), and the philosophy is copied by the ecosystem.