Rust support could be good, but does that mean a lot of work?
I mean, a lots of features that natively supported in Go require crates or coding-by-hand in Rust, maybe that's why Go gets supported first.
I mean, a lots of features that natively supported in Go require crates or coding-by-hand in Rust, maybe that's why Go gets supported first.
Honestly the reason why official Rust support may never make sense is that it's so easy to use Neon to build native Node modules with Rust. Not one line of JS is needed and the impedance between the two languages is minimal. Go would require more hacks and copying thanks to both it and Node having their own GC. Basically Rust is flexible enough that official support isn't necessary whereas Go requires official support to avoid ugly hacks.
FWIW, I've never used Lambda to do what I'm suggesting above, but I've done it with GCP's equivalent and it works great.
I suspect the only thing Amazon will care about here is consumer demand, and potentially the ability of consumers to move from other platforms to theirs (e.g. if Google cloud supports <thing> they are more likely to do so in order to convince people to move).
Rust is a cool language, but it's use in HTTP services is not as widespread as Go, and there are a bunch of other languages I'd expect first (PHP, Ruby?)