For any open source project, you are marketing as much towards potential developers as you are end-users. Note that their home page doesn't say "Rust" at all. However, on Hacker News, there are potential contributors, and so giving them a bit of information about the project can be useful.

This makes a lot of sense to me, and I've never thought of it like this before. Excellent point!

It could attract more developers.

Better than "written in C++" and it kind of implies the code base may be fresh than inheriting some old implementations from a decade ago.

We want to make sure it's not being written in Electron

Front-end is, though: https://github.com/revoltchat/desktop

They can use tauri. A new fresh tech and it is efficient also. They should consider it as the title of this post says revolt is written in rust. So they can try more rusty ways making revolt.

I welcome apps using Electron, most Electron apps I use work great and have nice UIs that are consistent across platforms

As far as I can tell, Electron is the only cross-platform UI toolkit where it's even possible to get accessibility right on every OS.

At least for me, the story quite simply ends there. No, it's not the GUI toolkit I wish I had, but, if the goal is to develop for the 21st century, then I think that being accessible is the ethical choice. And, given the current tech landscape, that goal is satisfied by three options: Electron, developing three different native desktop GUIs, or deciding not to support less popular platforms.

I'd rather have UIs that are true to their platform (and all the nice little accoutrements that come with) than this universal, inconsistent crap that works OK at best

It’s a well known way of getting your post to HN frontpage.

If only we could filter out this stuff.

Rust is such a niche language still that I'd consider it a red flag if I was an investor.

You would make a bad investor if you can't recognize the writing on the wall.

Which is?

That Rust has rapidly gone from niche language to powering projects at some of the biggest names in technology, and will almost certainly continue to increase in that marketshare.

https://foundation.rust-lang.org/members/ just look at the companies that are a part of the foundation.

IMHO: Rust is going to be very very popular on everything from embedded to client-side web apps.

Headlines like the one on this submission makes me think "finally, someone has started to write that thing in a sensible language".

I very much hope Rust becomes popular in the embedded space... but other languages are better for apps IMO.

I'd rather use a click listener with TS/Kotlin/Swift than be forced into idiomatic Rust's architectural workarounds.

This project made the right call, using TS for the client.

To be fair, as a Rust fan I think Kotlin and Swift definitely do better in app development still. They have a lot of good language features and their communities are stellar.

I don't insist on everything being Rust. But it gets very close in many areas IMO.

That Rust is gaining both mind-share and market share.

A lot of the HN folks wage meaningless language wars that are a distraction from the actual success elements of Rust: namely that it removes a class of bugs by the mere virtue of your program compiling. Add to that a stellar quality and very dedicated community, sprinkle amazing tooling on top (semgrep filters, tree-sitter support, code-generation libraries) and it is a clear winner. Hence, "the writing on the wall" comment.

From HN and several other forums, plus a few companies I worked in, plus some meetups, I got the impression that the chief factor of slowing down Rust's adoption are a lot of C/C++ graybeards on influential positions that have an axe to grind against it and never bother to give actual technical arguments in a discussion. Unproductive and somewhat juvenile but hey, people being people.

That, plus the mind-boggling amount of C/C++ code that has to be rewritten should the world accept Rust as their successor is, shall we say, a very valid reason for its adoption to not be super fast. (And a fairly valid reason at that.) This problem sadly still exists. But with the Linux kernel starting to pay (some) attention to security problems, I have hope that such efforts will begin sooner rather than later.

Would you say that Rust's learning curve is also still an obstacle to widespread adoption?

It was a while ago, but I haven't asked around lately.

I'd say so, yes, but it's definitely easy to start with it and use it just fine before you have to delve deeper.

So a more apt comparison would be that you can use it on, say, 5 to 8 levels, and you could be absolutely fine on each of them.

It does require a bigger upfront investment for sure but it's not as big as many claim.

What makes it niche to you? It's got quite a strong foothold now in a lot of major companies, and projects.

Just look at the numbers.

What does that mean? The numbers show that a lot of companies are using Rust. Which numbers do you think make it seem niche?

The numbers show that Rust has ~2% market share compared to Js/Ts/Java/etc it is nothing.

I would consider it was a interesting flag if I was an investor. Many startups choose languages because of the benefices that they have, I cant see discord as it is nowadays without Elixir for example.

But obviously, some startups choose because its cool, this ones you shall avoid.