This is all valuable feedback.
But
Rust is new, so libraries are still in flux. That happens with being 'new'.
This seems more like single dev running out of time. Not a huge condemnation of Rust.
That in mind, the main reason why people tend to get frustrated with Rust to the point of condemning it is because Rust programmers tend to be rather zealous of how much they want to spread it's use, even in domains where it's more a disadvantage than a strength (game dev is the most obvious example, but Rust is a quagmire of constant rewrites if you have any form of rapid iteration or unstable specs). When those disadvantages subsequently pop up and become an issue, the response from Rust programmers often amounts to "you're holding it wrong", which just makes people curious about the language more annoyed since it comes across like their problems aren't being taken seriously.
It's perhaps no surprise that Rust communities oft find overlap with Wayland and Nix zealots because of this, where the shortcomings of their tools aren't an impediment to getting as many people as possible to use their tools.
I don't think it's any concerted movement, it's just that people tend to get annoyed when they're preached to even when what's being preached doesn't work for them, so they push back against it.
It was a personal project then. It wasn't until 2009 that it was shared more publicly, and the first stable release was in 2015.
That's still almost ten years ago, so your overall conclusion about it not being new is not incorrect, but it's not as old as you suggest here.
There have always been people who have been skeptical of, or dislike, Rust. Just like every technology.
> even something organized and funded to push anti-Rust sentiment?
Nah, anyone who believes this is engaging in conspiracy theory.
Ask innocent question about why there seems to be a lot of drama, negative feedback about Rust.
Get downvoted.
Isn't this part of the problem? Can't ask about it without inviting backlash?
Was only asking in this way, because a lot of the negative feedback in the entire thread, seemed counter to how things actually are in Rust. Kind of like FUD.
That said, if you actually look at the things the critics are saying, most of them are from a place of misunderstandings. Every time there is some Rust drama, tech influencers like primagen are doing back bends to be “fair”, even if it means given reasonable doubt to an unreasonable position, lest they turn off audience members who are too emotionally invested in seeing Rust be bad because it validates their choices.
What a weird thing to say. There is no 'standard language', never has been and never will be (otherwise we'd all be programming in Java or Javascript, which during their heydays were 'obviously' becoming the 'future standard programming language').