Eventually, when Rust finally catches up with C++ ecosystem, including being used in industry standards like Khronos APIs, CUDA, console devkits, HPC and HFT standards.
Until then, the choice is pretty much between C and C++, and the latter provides a much saner and safer alternative, than a language that keeps pretending to be portable macro assembler.
Binding just fine isn't the same as taking part in the conversation of industry standards, and being shipped in vendor SDKs.
Requires manual work from people willing to put into the effort, lesser development experience reading documents written for other languages, no out of the box plugins for IDEs, or graphical debuggers support, e.g. CUDA as one such example.
Comments
Following that argument, c++ is also a colossal waste of time and energy and bugs when compared with Rust :D.
Eventually, when Rust finally catches up with C++ ecosystem, including being used in industry standards like Khronos APIs, CUDA, console devkits, HPC and HFT standards.
Until then, the choice is pretty much between C and C++, and the latter provides a much saner and safer alternative, than a language that keeps pretending to be portable macro assembler.
You can bind to C and c++ libraries just fine. There’s plenty of Rust bindings for Vulkan and CUDA, the canonical implementation of WebGPU is in rust.
Binding just fine isn't the same as taking part in the conversation of industry standards, and being shipped in vendor SDKs.
Requires manual work from people willing to put into the effort, lesser development experience reading documents written for other languages, no out of the box plugins for IDEs, or graphical debuggers support, e.g. CUDA as one such example.