You seem unnecessarily angry. I choose to not respond to everything, because it's not all constructive. You don't choose Rust because you hate your employer.

You seem unnecessarily angry. I choose to not respond to everything, because it's not all constructive. You don't choose Rust because you hate your employer. You don't choose Rust to make development go slower. I'm not sure what the definition of "unmanaged language" is, and how Rust ends up being one. There are reasons to choose Rust when you could have chosen another language as well. For example: I worked for a company built on PHP and TypeScript. They had a stable cashflow, but the performance of the apps was down the drain (poorly made, poor technology), but the money was there. Gradually refactoring the busy parts in a performant language by competent programmers would solve the scaling problem. Choosing a popular and performant language would ensure new hires. A solid choice here would be C# or Java. Rust would be another option: it attracts qualified candidates, and you don't need to experiment much with the software design and architecture. > This is complete non-sequitur. Just because I'm responding to your comment, it does not mean that what I say should logically follow from what you said. I'm adding information.