> challenges with Rust are written off in an off-hand way and its features exaggerated I think people are pretty straightforward about Rust's challenges. The b

> challenges with Rust are written off in an off-hand way and its features exaggerated I think people are pretty straightforward about Rust's challenges. The borrow checker can be a hurdle and probably needs more work (although it is getting a big boost soon with non-lexical lifetimes). Compile times are not great. The macro system is powerful but can be confusing. People from some mainstream languages may have trouble wrapping their heads around the type system. Regarding its features, these attributes: * it can do low level, fast code; * it's not garbage collected, but is memory safe; * it has zero cost abstractions (and, conversely, it doesn't have ridiculous, unnecessary, slow abstractions); * it doesn't ignore the last thirty years of innovation in programming languages (by which I mean it has a modern type system, closures, variant types, and a few other things); * it doesn't have 30-40 years of cruft; * it has a standard and very high quality build/packaging system; * its developers are thoughtful and have good taste; * it has a reasonably big community and has a good chance of catching on even more widely; are huge. You say you think its features are exaggerated, but to my mind, what's to exaggerate? That list looks pretty great to me.