[no_wizard]

to be honest, HN is one of the few venues where I think someone who is core to a project might actually see what is said about a language. I've tried getting involved in mailing lists and stuff, but they aren't often as welcoming to this discussion as one might assume.

My hope is that by raising these things on HN, someone will take notice in a different way and at least start considering / revisiting alternatives

[untitaker_]

All of this would be correct in an alternative reality where everybody in the Rust community, including every person ever involved in the language's evolvement isn't aware of these complaints.

[Kranar]

Your comment is self defeating. The reason people are aware of these complaints is because they keep being brought up, over and over.

This is a serious wart on language design and while I can agree that it's likely too late to fix it for Rust, there is a kind of race among new languages to be a successor to C++ in many of the domains C++ is used in, and while I think Rust does hold a lead in that race, the race is not over.

A language that can provide an ergonomic solution to concurrency would absolutely provide a huge boost to any such language, and so to people in that space, listen to these complaints. Async/await is not a good solution to this problem.

You almost always hear people complaining about async/await in every language it's a part of but you rarely hear people complain about how Go manages concurrency.