It seems to offer a lot of the same things Rust offers, and Rust is immensely popular. What failings of Pony caused it to fall behind in popularity and adoption while Rust sprinted ahead?
Some interesting discussions here:<p><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/34rszb/pony_type_and_memory_safe_language/" rel="nofollow">https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/34rszb/pony_type_and_...</a><p><a href="https://www.wallaroo.ai/blog/wallaroo-move-to-rust" rel="nofollow">https://www.wallaroo.ai/blog/wallaroo-move-to-rust</a><p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28777306" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28777306</a><p>My sense is that Rust's constructs target more closely the mental schemas of individuals most concerned with memory safety; e.g., systems programming with lots of C, but wanting something more functional and safe.<p>I can see the comparisons between Pony and Rust, but I personally see them as kind of different in terms of who they might appeal to the most.
Pony was technically far ahead of Rust, but Rust used massive overhyping to attract more users, and hence got a much better library ecosystem.<p>The liers are now thanksfully gone, but the compiler limitations are still there.