The fact that they could go from zero to proof of concept in a year and then into production just 2-3 years later is impressive. Given these results I feel the industry will slowly move to Rust once a certified toolchain for safety critical systems exists.<p>At the same time, let's not forget that this is a highly competent team with tons of experience. It's not guaranteed that other developers can have the same success.
After reading part of article I realised it’s about Rust the programming language. Not the rust-colored car called Rust as author obviously intended to confuse people with that image and ambiguous title.
The article mentions a few times that Rust is a good choice because the code is <i>NOT</i> safety critical.<p>Is that because the safety critical code requires the compiler/libraries/etc. to have some certification Rust currently lacks?<p>If not I don’t understand why it’s phrased that way.
So, will RUST ever have standards for safety critical systems like C/C++. Example MISRA for car programs? Or is the migration or certification too expensive and time consuming?
When I see a Rust post, I don't buy into the hype. It's usually compared with raw C, even C++. This is not a good comparison IMHO, since C/C++ has too many footguns/confusions.<p>Instead, compare it to a nicer/stricter "C" equivalent like Zig. Now, Rust doesn't shine as much.