The tweet has an arguable assumption, but on the other hand, an important truth:
The future will solve this automagically: people using Rust massively will pay a productivity tax that if not counter balanced by the safety wins will turn into a competitive issue. And most folks are now using Rust where more productive garbage-collected language would be better
The core is "most folks are now using Rust where more productive garbage-collected language would be better". This is very true: GC'ed languages are nowadays fast and expressive enough that they may covert the vast majority of use cases. Use cases for low-level languages are shrinking.
What I find arguable about this tweet is:
people using Rust massively will pay a productivity tax that if not counter balanced by the safety wins will turn into a competitive issue
This assumes that there is a significant amount of teams who choose Rust lightly, without assessing its complexity. I think this is not the case, as it's a notoriously hard language, and it's not an obvious choice (although there is people who suggest it for webdev, which I think it's not appropriate, in general). But on the other hand, I don't have statistics on this.
a significant amount of teams who choose Rust lightly, without assessing its complexity. I think this is not the case,
That's not what happened with CORBA, J2EE, microservices ... People have all sorts of reasons for using something heavier than what is required - from CV enhancement to combating boredom.
It's possible, but the job market is not reflecting this. The popular languages (JS, Java, Golang, Python) are immensely more popular than Rust in terms of job offers.
Comments
The tweet has an arguable assumption, but on the other hand, an important truth:
The core is "most folks are now using Rust where more productive garbage-collected language would be better". This is very true: GC'ed languages are nowadays fast and expressive enough that they may covert the vast majority of use cases. Use cases for low-level languages are shrinking.
What I find arguable about this tweet is:
This assumes that there is a significant amount of teams who choose Rust lightly, without assessing its complexity. I think this is not the case, as it's a notoriously hard language, and it's not an obvious choice (although there is people who suggest it for webdev, which I think it's not appropriate, in general). But on the other hand, I don't have statistics on this.
That's not what happened with CORBA, J2EE, microservices ... People have all sorts of reasons for using something heavier than what is required - from CV enhancement to combating boredom.
It's possible, but the job market is not reflecting this. The popular languages (JS, Java, Golang, Python) are immensely more popular than Rust in terms of job offers.