I must admit that I'm disappointed with this article. It' fairly standard "why isn't X used in a field A" and the answer is: we've always used Y, so all libraries and tooling assume Y, and things are slow to change around here anyway. There is nothing specific to Rust, and the only semi-specific thing to embedded programing is noting the reliance on vendor provided libraries. I wouldn't be surprised if it was generated by ChatGPT.
ChatGTP won't make claims such as "Rust is an exciting language, and I expect it to gain market share slowly. However, I expect more teams to adopt C++ than Rust over the next half-decade." but will use a lot more weasel words haha.
As for the argument being "it's not standard", it's dull but quite true
2 Comments
Tushta@programming.dev · 0 pts · 3y
I must admit that I'm disappointed with this article. It' fairly standard "why isn't X used in a field A" and the answer is: we've always used Y, so all libraries and tooling assume Y, and things are slow to change around here anyway. There is nothing specific to Rust, and the only semi-specific thing to embedded programing is noting the reliance on vendor provided libraries. I wouldn't be surprised if it was generated by ChatGPT.
yoshi@programming.dev · 1 pts · 3y
ChatGTP won't make claims such as "Rust is an exciting language, and I expect it to gain market share slowly. However, I expect more teams to adopt C++ than Rust over the next half-decade." but will use a lot more weasel words haha.
As for the argument being "it's not standard", it's dull but quite true