I wrote "Less religious missionaries. Also, less funding by FAANG." To answer your question, I honestly don't have a strong opinion about Rust. I had to deal w

I wrote "Less religious missionaries. Also, less funding by FAANG." To answer your question, I honestly don't have a strong opinion about Rust. I had to deal with it years ago when I needed to recompile parts of Firefox and back then it seemed OK but still a bit messy, like all new programming languages. But I cannot shake the feeling that Rust has some very loud fanboys. The original mailing list entry is about Rust being merged into Linux-next. C++ and Java are already in there, too [1]. So while that is a great preparatory step for Rust, it's not the big breakthrough that it is presented as. By now, I've read so many articles that overstated the benefits of Rust (e.g. "zero cost abstractions" - which then fail to optimize) that I immediately become suspicious if something is news purely because it relates to Rust. And w.r.t. my second statement. The original article thanks Google for their generous funding. Which is true. Rust did receive generous funding from many sources, because companies who need a safer alternative to C / C++ tend to like it. And I believe that is a factor which contributes to Rust being merged into linux-next while other languages weren't. Rust has the necessary funding to do the preparatory work. [1] Java(tm) Binary Kernel Support for Linux https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/admin-guide/java.html https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/admin-guide/java.html