[tialaramex]

> [...] counting every clock. Rust strikes a good balance, and some of my favorite software is written in it, but C++ isn’t obsolete.

This isn't a good argument for C++. If you can't get where you need to go in Rust because you are "counting every clock" you need to go down, which means writing assembler -- not sideways to C++. Once you're counting every clock, none of the high level languages can help you, because you're at the mercy of their compiler's internal representation of your program and their optimisers. If you care whether we use CPU instruction A or CPU instruction B, you need the assembler, which likewise cares, and not a high level language.

Both C++ and Rust provide inline assembler if that's what you resort to.

There are things to like about C++ but "counting every clock" isn't one of them.