The relative learning curve between Rust and C++ is strongly dependent on the type of software you are building. I use both. They each have domains where the ot

The relative learning curve between Rust and C++ is strongly dependent on the type of software you are building. I use both. They each have domains where the other is not particularly close in being equally effective (or safe!) as a programming language. One area where C++ still runs rings around Rust, for example, is modern database kernels. Rust’s safety features largely don’t apply, so no benefit, and Rust has large expressivity gaps that make it more complex and less safe to implement things that are straightforward in C++. Also, the relatively weak generics and metaprogramming features of Rust causes this type of code to balloon in size and invites bugs. But for other types of code, this barely matters at all because you don’t have many uses for these C++ features. Horses for courses.