Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get the point you're making. Yes, the popularity of technologies is impacted by the popularity of related technologies. My argument is that Rust is certainly going to remain relevant for the next 20 years or so. When this project is no longer maintained, it probably won't be because Rust is no longer being developed, and it probably won't be because nobody writes Rust around. If Lapce were written in somethin…
> I don't get the point you're making Just that Emacs was written almost a half century ago, and is still thriving despite being written in a language (LISP) that is basically obsolete. > My argument is that Rust is certainly going to remain relevant for the next 20 years or so Maybe, maybe not. Look at how quickly Perl (so promising to begin with) disappeared to be replaced by Python. Many new languages have tried,…
Yes, this is true. I still stand by my point that the longevity of a language has implications for the longevity of most projects. It's a probabilistic statement with exceptions, and Emacs is exceptional.
It's also worth noting that Emacs is written in Emacs Lisp, a language which is regularly updated.
> Look at how quickly Perl (so promising to begin with) disappeared to be replaced by Python.
Don't get me wrong, Rust's longevity is a guess. It's in the Linux kernel now, so that gives me hope that learning Rust is paying off.
Cargo is fantastically nicer to use than most other languages tooling. If I'm wrong, then that means something even nicer than cargo is around, which would be very nice indeed.
> If the likelihood of being around in 20 years ... was the main decision making factor, then Java would probably be a safer bet.
This is true, but the premise doesn't hold. The longevity isn't the main decision making factor. No decision is even being made, and you're arguing against a point nobody is making.
Please refer to my original comment: I'm only listing reasons why I like knowing something is written in Rust.