> I was a Rust v1 contributor. I have great hopes for the language as a replacement for c in systems engineering. However, I much prefer C++ 20 for the kind of

> I was a Rust v1 contributor. I have great hopes for the language as a replacement for c in systems engineering. However, I much prefer C++ 20 for the kind of work I do (scientific computing). Rust isn't a competitor to C++ in that arena, in my humble opinion. There's a lot of domains where Rust isn't an appropriate replacement. Notice I phrased it as "if you have the choice between Rust and C++". Often times because of libraries/frameworks you need, that may not really be a choice. > The phrase 'statistically speaking' suggests the collection of empirical data. Could you elaborate? I don't have data apart from two decades of screening candidates and conducting interviews. I've heard this from other people, including Paul Graham, and I've seen it in my personal experience. I probably should have chosen different wording to not mislead people that this is backed by hard data. > If Rust becomes popular enough, this will no longer be any truer than for people who learn c++. That's how it goes. Python was once a signal for finding better developers. That's no longer true.