I've worked with both Rust and Go quite a bit, but not professionally with C or C++. Those two cover a lot of potential green field stuff, like networking, CLI, embedded, etc (maybe not games/graphics as much). Rust is significantly harder to pick up, so check out Go if you haven't already considered it. Most people become productive quickly. That said, much of what you learn in Rust is generally useful for understanding, so it depends on what your goal is.

> Can Rust replace C or C++ yet, atleast for green field projects?

Mozilla has been replacing parts of Firefox C++ with Rust for a decade. They recently celebrated Rust hitting 25% of the LoC in the main repo. More broadly, serious code at large companies is written in Rust: A chunk of Google's Fuchsia OS, Dropbox's storage engine, Amazon's VM manager, etc. There are niches where C/C++ are better suited but in general Rust is good for whatever if the team wants to use it.

Totally, and could even be for old projects too. Is more a problem of will and commitment.

The pace of Rust is increasing, and anyway for the things is not possible to change right now Rust interacting with C/C++ is less hairy than other langs FFI...

I wasn’t under the impression that Rust is all there for embedded micros? I know some people have proven it can be done, but when I go to work with the latest Atmel/MicroChip/Nordic/STM chips, the tools normalized are C tool chains. To use Rust, I’d have to blaze paths. Frankly I’m more intrigued by upython for some (but not all) of the embedded work I do.

Only in some domains, if you do anything in graphics or GUI related, be prepared to be a contributor to the ecosystem.