if the tooling would be on par
I am betting person, and I say: "It never will be." It is easy to overlook the importance of better developer tooling. It directly translates into higher developer productivity. Every time I am forced to use a language with worse developer tooling, I am reminded of this performance hit. This is why Microsoft spends so much time and efforts on its developer tools. Also: Better tooling means below average developers can level-up to average. This is most of corporate computing, so a win for the bean counters.Also: There is not single, commercial, controlling force behind Rust, like Java and DotNet.
Don't interpret this post as anything against Rust. I think it is a brilliant language.
I feel this daily as a Clojure programmer. I've been playing with Copilot, and it's astonishing how much worse Copilot is at generating Clojure code, than say, Js. The difference is probably due to training volume, and if AI-assisted coding is worth it at all, the benefits will primarily accrue to the largest languages.
Personally, I find the JetBrains IDEs overly complicated. More so than Visual Studio, but that may be familiarity. (Also, I use VSCode for .NET these days so full IDEs feel heavy to me anyway.)
See ONYX, DirectML and ML.NET announcements at BUILD.
Neither ONNX, nor DirectML, nor ML.NET excel at deep learning. TorchSharp is the closest to what is needed for the modern ML work, and there is almost no investment in it - I believe there's just one person working on it, and even that is part time.
The only thing that keeps me on C# is lack of Rust debuggers that would be able to evaluate arbitrary Rust expressions including full support for traits.