i don't think rust is an adequate replacement for c/c++. it's a language with a very specific purpose.
it's great for writing security software, or software that needs to be proved. i think rust is more in competition with ada. and i kind of prefer ada.
rust just doesn't have the ... agility that C has.
modern software engineering practices gave us the likes of facebook and twitter. both of which have a garbage code base.
just because something manages to steam along as long as you throw the latest bit of hardware at it doesn't mean it's good engineering.
I think I mentioned that once. Just because we have more powerful hardware doesn't mean we have to write less efficient software. Nobody cares about optimisations and memory efficiency these days. I used to play great games on my Atari ST with 1Mb of RAM. It sounds like scifi today, to have only 1Mb of memory.
should have figured.
i started out on the c64, then on to the amiga. in my experience, people who started out with those early systems grew to appreciate hardware limitations and getting every last bit of processing power out of them.
now with everything practically being emulated and a dozen CPUs living in each computer, programmers don't care about resources or efficiency. as long as they can roll something out quickly and it functions relatively fast.
The good old days:
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
We strive for transparency and don't collect excess data.