OK. Thanks.
My guess was that since almost no one will pay more for a game's having fewer security vulns, there is less benefit to incurring the expense of Rust (takes longer to learn, development speed is slightly less)
My guess was that since almost no one will pay more for a game's having fewer security vulns, there is less benefit to incurring the expense of Rust (takes longer to learn, development speed is slightly less)
For example I like to play Civ with a friend, but stopped because about once every 30 minutes one of us would have their game crash. If it was written in Rust, I assume it might be more stable.
That said, I don't really think Rust is a good choice for CRUD apps, because development velocity is more important than performance and they probably don't need to be multithreaded anyway.
But Rust would have been great for a lot of "systems" stuff that was historically written in Java, like Flink or Hadoop for example.
The point of Rust is to be a language that competes in the same niche as C++ but makes it much more difficult to write large classes of bug, much broader than just "security vulns".