[davidpelaez]

I agree many people use Go for it's simplicity for new developers which is understandable but not the only way to measure why a language should be adopted.

I'm yet to verify this, but it seems that Rust is closer to Haskell in that it intends to enhance the likeliness of program correctness as it's being written and not only through testing. In go you still get runtime errors and I don't think it's all that rare, Rust should reduce those greatly.

I do share that adoption through libraries and widespread acceptance is very important and when you compare Rust to Haskell you make a nice point, the language could be great but not generate adoption.

However besides adoption I don't see anyone who seem to dislike the process of writing Rust itself. Apparently people think it's viable if more libraries are out there. The natural presentation of the arguments made me feel that people are open to it should the right libraries be there.