Comment by procaryote
Comment by procaryote 2 days ago
The other direction might be more interesting, in case rust drops in popularity in a couple of years, leaving behind a bunch of "let's rewrite in rust" efforts
Comment by procaryote 2 days ago
The other direction might be more interesting, in case rust drops in popularity in a couple of years, leaving behind a bunch of "let's rewrite in rust" efforts
I think Rust has hit critical mass. It's now basically the default choice for something you want to perform well but want to be reasonably secure. For example, uv in the python ecosystem.
I wouldn't be surprised if that was closer to the truth. A heck of a lot of boring software runs on the JVM. That said, it's a slightly different niche from command line tools.
Rust is the clear winner of the LLM era. With code generation being so effortless, why would you write in any other language?
i don't use LLMs, but i've heard people complain current LLMs are not good at writing Rust
new chips will always have a c compiler available long before anything else
Language popularity is cyclical; the hedge is to treat Rust as an implementation detail behind stable, language-agnostic boundaries (protocols, C ABI, WASM) and invest in strong tests/specs. If Rust wanes, migrate piecemeal: keep interfaces, reimplement modules elsewhere, and verify parity with property tests and benchmarks. Multi-agent, agentic LLM workflows can prototype alternatives in parallel, generate FFI/interop shims, and cross-check behavior to de-risk the swap without another “big rewrite.”
That would also help use Rust in platforms that only have a C compiler.
People have used mrustc like that to put rust on a c64. The number of targets that make sense from a word length perspective that aren't already supported by llvm are pretty small I think? You aren't going to compile rust to some fixed point dsp where a long is 48bits. The c anything is likely to generate won't compile in whatever odd not-quite-ansi c compiler the chip maker provides.
That could be interesting. If some new language or tool appears that automatically figures out the correct lifetime and ownership of the resources in your program, people (might be the same people) will call for rewrites from Rust into the new language, as you would no longer have to assign memory ownership manually.
I am not convinced that anyone would take a working rust project and rewrite it in C. I don’t see any good reason to do so.
When rust will lose popularity, it is going to happen eventually, I would bet it’s in favour of a newer and more promising programming language. Not C.