[sseagull]

Is that because of the language itself, or because people who develop in Rust right now tend to really like programming, and are likely above-average developers?

I don’t really hate Rust and like what it has done for safety, but it hasn’t really been used widely enough to see what happens if “the masses” start to use it.

[pornel]

It is Rust itself. My Rust programs are less buggy than my C and JS programs, and I'm not smarter when writing Rust. In fact, I'm much lazier.

Where other languages say "you're just a bad programmer and you should feel bad", Rust makes it its own problem, and focuses on preventing such mistakes instead. Rust's infamous learning curve is from enforcing a ton of requirements that ultimately make more robust programs. You have to handle errors. You have to lock mutexes. You have limits on mutability and global state. You have to think about data flow, and can't just make a program that is a web of everything referencing everything else.

Rust is not that new. The masses are already using it. I've worked with Rust noobs, and I've seen "Enterprise Rust". Bad Rust code is still not that terrible. The language limits how much damage noobs can can cause. There's tooling to help with unidiomatic code. Heavy use of dependencies and strictness of Rust's interfaces means noobs can write simple glue code on top of someone else's robust code.