[kmicklas]

These piles of money don't seem to be amounting to much because rust is still an objectively far superior language.

Google is not a language company and doesn't hire good language people so I don't see this changing.

Disclaimer: I work for Google

[jstewartmobile]

No argument on superior, it's just that superior doesn't win the day. Look at C++. Look at JavaScript. It would be surprising if the industry made the better choice for a change.

[eropple]

Hmm--with some edge-case exceptions that never got a strong push outside of some niches (Ada comes to mind, where it achieved some traction in DoD circles), I wonder if C++ wasn't the superior choice given its time and place. By no means is it perfect, but in the early to mid 90's there weren't many competitors with a similar feature set that had anybody pushing hard behind it. To my mind it seems not dissimilar.

If I have to write native code, right now it'll be C++ precisely because it's able to express complex problems with a high degree of getting-it-right (because while I would never claim to understand C++, I feel confident in my understanding of the subset of C++ that I use). I really like Rust and look forward to it being a better fit for what I want to do, and every time I look at it it's getting closer.

[kmicklas]

Spot on, C++ has always been the best systems language for real world projects until Rust came along.

[kmicklas]

Yeah but unlike, say, Haskell, Rust seems to have good enough momentum from the right crowds.