> Except that it is cheaper than a rewrite in Rust, which is one of the several reasons why this is currently the preferred approach in industry segments that require certain correctness guarantees. I don't know if you know this, but Rust isn't exactly making big headways in the safety/security-critical software world, especially, though not only, in embedded (for a multitude of reasons). Those sound static analysis tools, on the other hand, are showing nice growth.

Rust is way too new for that obviously. And as I said, because tooling and hiring pool are not here yet, it would be a critical mistake to attempt such move at the moment.

For new projects however, Rust is a really interesting bet. (I was until recently working on a new medical robot, whose software was mostly Rust and the speed at which we got it working was really exciting!).

> in any event, few people in the low-level programming space who aren't currently using C++ are even thinking about, let alone considering, Rust.

That's not my experience. Not many are considering it for a lot of reasons (too new, not enough people mastering it, resistance to change etc.) But “thinking about” is another story ;).

> You are assuming that Rust is the preferrable choice

Zig isn't really a choice at this point. It might become it in a few years, but there still a long way to go.