• Rust competes with C that comes with a leaking lead-acid battery, so Rust's standard library already seems large and luxurious in comparison. • One size does

• Rust competes with C that comes with a leaking lead-acid battery, so Rust's standard library already seems large and luxurious in comparison. • One size does not fit all. Rust targets many different environments, including embedded and WASM. A big stdlib makes porting Rust harder. It's already problematic, e.g. `std::fs` makes no sense in a browser context, and std's out-of-memory handling strategy was unacceptable for the Linux kernel. • Rust is judged by the size of its "Hello World!" executable, which already looks pretty fat due having stdlib linked statically. • Rust has a strong backwards-compatibility guarantee, which means that anything stabilized in stdlib has to stay, forever, and can't evolve. Not many features can be nailed on the first try, and not nailing them means people will forever debate whether to use the worse-but-standard version or a 3rd party version. • Rust has already dodged some bullets, because 3rd party `serde` turned out better than Rust's old built-in `rustc-serialize`, `syn` won over Rust's `syntex`, `criterion` is better than built-in `bencher`, `rand` had 8 major revisions, `time` broke compat 3 times, etc. • Rust is stuck with `std::mpsc` which turned out to be slower and less flexible than `crossbeam-channel`. • Rust team is not an infinite resource. • The Rust language is designed to be extensible via libraries, unlike Go where e.g. maps, channels, range iteration are special built-ins you can't replace.