[bsder]

Example clanky bit: memory ownership rules.

There are lots of systems where memory changes hands. Game programming, for example. You allocate a big chunk of memory, you put some stuff in it, you hand it off to the graphics card, and some amount of time later the graphics card hands it back to you.

Rust gets VERY cranky about this. You wind up writing a lot of unsafe code that is very difficult to make jibe with the expectations of the Rust compiler. It's, in fact, MUCH harder than writing straight C.

Example clanky bit: slab allocation

You often don't really care about deallocation of objects in slabs in video games because everything gets wiped on every frame. You'd rather just keep pushing forward since you know the whole block gets wiped 16 milliseconds from now. Avoiding drop semantics takes (generaly unsafe) code and work.

[tialaramex]

I see, so by "embedded systems" you meant a video game console ?

[bsder]

Yes, although I could have just as easily said "low-level systems programming" as embedded. I try to keep in mind that when people say "embedded" they may mean anything from ARM Cortex M series to Raspberry Pi 4s.

Rust is really good when it is control of everything. I love Rust for communication stacks (USB, CANBUS, etc.). Bytes in/state in to bytes out/state out is right in its wheelhouse. Apparently Google agrees--their new Bluetooth stack (Gabeldorsche) is written in Rust. When Rust has this kind of clearly delineated interface, it's really wonderful.

However, Rust does not play well with others as my examples point out. To be fair, neither do many other languages (Hell, C++ doesn't play well with itself). However, that's going to be a disadvantage going forward as the future is polyglot.