>>1006539
>if it looks like it'll be a very good language you can get points by writing early docs, articles, videos, books.
I'm not interested in doing any of those things. I'm interested in writing software.
>The last can get you some money but all can get help get you a job.
There are literally zero (0) jobs in Rust except at Mozilla which will probably go out of business in 5 years. At best it will give you brownie points for being a special snowflake who is autistic enough to care that much about languages (a good wagecuck). But you'd be paid to write in Java/C#/Python/C++, not Rust, so why not write books about those languages to get actually worthwhile points (and get an actual audience to read your articles).
>And if it's already good enough, you can use it for your own projects and benefit from whatever benefits it has.
The purely technical benefits would have to outweigh the effort it would take to learn the language.
>effort would be significant, on the order of months to years
>dozens of ``RFCs'' that change every day that you have to keep up with
>no mature libraries, every wheel waiting to be reinvented by shitty transgender js programmers
>you will get stuck on undocumented errors and have to delve into the source of the compiler to debug it, guaranteed
The benefits can't be the promise of using it in the future for your future projects, because you have no idea if Rust will survive or go in the ash heap of history like 98+% of all new languages. I took a quick glance at the Rust book, and I don't see nearly enough beneficial features to overcome all this effort.
If the cucks somehow meme it to widespread adoption by 2025, then I'll learn it. Until then, I'll stay /comfy/ not wasting my time on experimental timesinks.