Devil's advocate from the description at the top of relevant groups speaking. The two in areas I'm familiar with are areas I'm excited about seeing rust take off in the future, and are already a great use of it. I don't think those groups are the ones that will (or should) do it. Rust-GPU: This is the org responsible for Rust CUDA, which was a historically non-working library I spent too much time trying to get worki…
> ownership, generics, safety, Async Aren’t they the main selling points of Rust? Why use Rust over another language if you’re not using its main features?
However, that does not mean that every single piece of code must be 100% safe. An embedded developer today is already constantly juggling with safety. Especially when it comes to low-level hardware interaction, I'd rather have a raw unsafe API today than wait several years for an inevitably-flawed safe abstraction.
I don't need Rust to track the ownership of an I2C peripheral. It's a nice-to-have, but it is easy enough to do by yourself - there aren't that many of them and interactions are rather obvious. I'm already used to the possibility of mishandling some pins resulting in the board catching fire, I promise I can handle this.
On the other hand, I really do want Rust to keep track of what's going on in all my business logic, for all the same reasons you want memory safety on a regular computer. Is my 10k-line protocol handler safe? Sure would love a double-check on that!
So no, I'm not really all that interested in the fancy clever abstractions. Making sure the KISS ones are rock solid is far more important to me.