I think the biggest problem with C++ is the lack of explicit safety requiring you understand the internal mechanisms of how everything works in order to make us

I think the biggest problem with C++ is the lack of explicit safety requiring you understand the internal mechanisms of how everything works in order to make use of almost anything, combined with extremely high levels of abstraction. The high levels of abstraction are powerful, but quickly become footguns to the uninitiated (and the initiated alike at times). > Figuring out how to do something safely can be quite difficult. It can involve solving puzzles, and often involves rewriting things at several levels, especially when threads are involved. I think this gets to the core of really closing the gap. While the "insider" knowledge of C++ is really understanding the internal workings of these abstractions so you don't do something stupid with memory, the "insider" knowledge of Rust is knowing the specific patterns and routes that will work with the safety features of the language rather than against it for solving various problems. I can still say for me I spend a lot of time 'exploring' Rust, having the compiler bitch at me, and tweaking things about until they work. Sometimes it can be extremely frustrating, and given I have the insider knowledge of C++ with 20+ years experience, it's easier for me to just drop in and do exactly what I want to do (because I know it's safe... or at least I think it is ;) ) That being said, I'm very excited for languages like Rust, but there is still a gap of cost/benefit between it and C++ for the time being, at least for my professional use.