Re:Speed of Rust vs. C
by up2isomorphism on Sunday March 14, 2021 @01:41PM
(#26457122)
The article is using one or two features in a quick marketing style to promote rust.
- Regardless it is true or not, this seldom works in long term. I just simply point this observation out.
In fact language as tool is never about more features, it is about minimum features for maximize utilities, and Rust is already on the domain of "feature-rich" language.
As the article mentions, C is 50 years old. The fact that it's still used is evidence of its usefulness, sure. It has outlasted almost all of its peers.
Rust has been stable for under 6 years. In that time, it's been adopted by a slew of major companies, and people have used their free time to write some extremely good software in it. So by that metric, Rust's usefulness speaks for itself, too.