Why did Rust fail?

What went wrong here? Nine years have passed since Rust started. Releases have come and gone as scheduled, and many long promised features have finally landed. Some software is now written in Rust and bits of it may live on forever. Yet, as time went by, the project noticed a troubling trend: each new release brought fewer new users than the last. Barely enough new users to offset those who lost interest or otherwise moved on.

Rust never took over. Some would tell you that it is only a matter of time, but the ranks of such true believers are slowly shrinking. Many core team members abandoned ship in the last 12 months. Realists seem more frank: most languages fail and even getting as far as Rust did was quite an anomaly.

What's wrong with you guys? Mozilla delivered the perfect language and you let it wither and die.

rusty trombone

5k open issues on a compiler
Monthly syntax changes
Harder than C++ in practice

I could see Rust being useful in a few decades, but so far its not that good to replace C/C++.
D on the other hand is useful right now and was useful practically instantly, though its inferior in performance.

I was quite shocked by 5000 fucking issues. Turns out it's industry standard. At least they don't try to hide it.

Issues: D:4510 GCC:5329 Clang:6358 Rust:5065. Probably not accurate. I remember reading the D forum and seeing a lot of complaints about bugginess. Dunno about GCC/Clang/Rust so maybe someone else comment.

https://dlang.org/bugstats.html
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/report.cgi?x_axis_field=keywords&y_axis_field=version&z_axis_field=&no_redirect=1&query_format=report-table&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=gcc&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=SUSPENDED&bug_status=WAITING&bug_status=REOPENED&cf_known_to_fail_type=allwords&cf_known_to_work_type=allwords&longdesc_type=allwordssubstr&longdesc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&cf_gcchost_type=allwordssubstr&cf_gcchost=&cf_gcctarget_type=allwordssubstr&cf_gcctarget=&cf_gccbuild_type=allwordssubstr&cf_gccbuild=&bug_id=&bug_id_type=anyexact&emailassigned_to1=1&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailassigned_to2=1&emailreporter2=1&emailcc2=1&emailtype2=substring&email2=&emailtype3=substring&email3=&chfieldvalue=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&j_top=AND&f1=noop&o1=noop&v1=&format=table&action=wrap
https://bugs.llvm.org/report.cgi?x_axis_field=keywords&y_axis_field=version&z_axis_field=&no_redirect=1&query_format=report-table&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=clang&resolution=---&longdesc_type=allwordssubstr&longdesc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&deadlinefrom=&deadlineto=&bug_id=&bug_id_type=anyexact&emailassigned_to1=1&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailassigned_to2=1&emailreporter2=1&emailcc2=1&emailtype2=substring&email2=&emaillongdesc3=1&emailtype3=substring&email3=&chfieldvalue=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&j_top=AND&f1=noop&o1=noop&v1=&format=table&action=wrap

>>4
D/C++/Clang issues seem very minor in comparison with Rust, where interlocking dependencies and complex mechanics are practically in every issue.
The only thing close to this is C++ metatemplate programming: imagine a compiler that was built from that and macros(and they're close to Lisp in level of abstraction).
I have to admit Rust is now leaps and bounds more powerful than C++/Dlang because of these macros, but they add a huge layer of complex interactions with language changes breaking parts of compiler you'd never expect.
C++/Dlang issues are basically local bugs that would be patched in a few hours of determined effort without breaking anything else. Rust bugs are more complex and serious:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3AT-compiler

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/35968

rustc tromboner

It's fucking called "Rust"
and you wonder that it's rusting away?

but it didn't

Rust is the boomer of proglangs

Programming languages may fall, but my dubs never fail.

>>10
it's actually zoomer sjw

Ok boomer, tons of new projects are using it. I don't know why anyone would C or C++ now unless the target platform doesn't have a Rust compiler. Lol at making fun of some bug ticket items which are being addressed while C has the permanently unfixable problem of causing 90% of security vulnerabilities.

The programming overton window has expanded. C-tards are on the defensive now. With one final push, god willing, we will wipe them from this earth.

>>13,14
C is not going away anytime soon. C++ is actually evolving pretty fast.
TIOBE index still indicates Rust is #25
https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

Rust's closest competitor is Scratch.
C and Java share the top spot.

>>16
Aktshually
it's D-lang

falied? what was the mission?

>>15-16
If all that matters to you is the presently most popular things, then you would have been arguing in favor of punchcards in the 1960s.

C is still "popular" because a lot of legacy shit is written in it. C++ is growing because the people maintaining the old C shit found out you can use a C++ compiler on it and not have to suffer so much.

The future is now old man.

>>15
Lol at posting this article as an argument against Rust

It is also interesting to note that Rust scored an all time high by jumping from position 34 to 25 in one month. If the positive news about Rust continues it might become a member of the top 20.

the ultimate self-own

Rust has already given it's biggest work to the world, the absolutely hilarious Rust Code Of Conduct.

Nothing will ever be that funny again