> Let's face it – typically developers are familiar with OOP, garbage collected, dynamic programming languages.
I think most of these programmers, and their project are not the target of Rust? If you're writing Java/C# or higher level languages, you already made the choice to sacrifice some computing efficiency for programming efficiency.
I always thought Rust was more destined to convert C and C++ (and D/Swift/Go ?) programmers, that need the raw power and control.
I don't personally hear from many self-identified Java/C# people who are coming to Rust. Maybe they exist and I don't hear from them, or they don't describe themselves as such.
There are some Go developers, but it seems the languages attract very different types of people, so there aren't many. There are some people who do love both.
There are only a few people from D (of which technically if you squint I'm sort of one, incidentally.)
> I think most of these programmers, and their project are not the target of Rust? If you're writing Java/C# or higher level languages, you already made the choice to sacrifice some computing efficiency for programming efficiency.
Or you just don't know any better, as was the case for me.
There are many benefits to Rust that are not related to runtime efficiency.
Well, I have not "switched". For now I am just learning (at a very slow pace).
My current job is not in ruby any more, now I do Lua - I'm a core dev at Kong - https://konghq.com/ . It's much lower-level than ruby, but still not as low as you can go with rust.
I think most of these programmers, and their project are not the target of Rust? If you're writing Java/C# or higher level languages, you already made the choice to sacrifice some computing efficiency for programming efficiency.
I always thought Rust was more destined to convert C and C++ (and D/Swift/Go ?) programmers, that need the raw power and control.