There is strong evidence, by the opinions of developers working in those industries. Because rust imposes more work onto the developer, it takes less time to wr

There is strong evidence, by the opinions of developers working in those industries. Because rust imposes more work onto the developer, it takes less time to write C++ and debug any safety issues than it does to get anything working in rust. There are C++ game engines with far fewer man hours put into them than bevy that have produced much more spectacular results. Stop taking that quote out of context. “Existing modern languages already provide an excellent developer experience: Go, Swift, Kotlin, Rust, and many more. Developers that can use one of these existing languages should. Unfortunately, the designs of these languages present significant barriers to adoption and migration from C++. These barriers range from changes in the idiomatic design of software to performance overhead.” Their recommendation is to use a language that is available now, one of which is rust, instead of waiting on carbon. They didn’t imply any technical advantage of rust over carbon, because there aren’t any. Being less flexible isn’t an advantage.