> I'd rather see over-the-top evangelism than the lack of it, because the latter implies that things aren't going to change very fast. No new technology should

> I'd rather see over-the-top evangelism than the lack of it, because the latter implies that things aren't going to change very fast. No new technology should be an excuse to engage in unprofessional conduct. When you propose changes to software, you listen to feedback, provide analysis of the benefits and detriments, and make an informed decision. Rust isn't special, and isn't a pass to cause endless heartache for end users and developers because your code is in a "safer" language. New rust code should be held to the same standards as new C and C++ code that causes breakage. Evangelism isn't useful here, let the tool speak for itself.