Your points are good, but parent's comment has mostly been about OO which is not necessarily a successful abstraction in these areas. AAA or kernels games are

Your points are good, but parent's comment has mostly been about OO which is not necessarily a successful abstraction in these areas. AAA or kernels games are traditionally written on a low level, i.e. C with maybe some convenience C++. Especially for memory management there just isn't a good one-size-fits-all abstraction. Look for AAA games or kernels in Java. Another problem of OO for high-performance or complex architecture is the mindset it inflicts upon developers. It motivates decomposition in "independent" objects, while this is just not possible. You have to think about processes in the large, about dataflows, about how to structure information and how to handle cross-cutting concerns, etc. Getting at these problems with an OO mindset leads right into desaster. Look up data-oriented programming. Look how a game engine is architected. There are lots of memory and resource managers, for example. But nobody would think of a Vertex as an individual "object". Or break his head how to design a character object, when related data really has to sit all over the project (character world position and state, associated 3d resources, sound resources, ....). >> Rust > You mean the programming language that adds a new abstraction of "borrowing and ownership" to help simplify the confusing existing abstractions of memory management and data race detection? So far, it's just an attempt to enable mindless OO-style programming without inflicting a runtime, but I guess with very limiting mechanics. And it inflicts a huge syntactic overhead. I predict the applications of Rust are very limited. Game programmers are usually (as far as I know) not very busy with memory management problems.