• echo64@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s more likely that they see rust as a good successor to their legacy c++ code. Microsoft has always been heavily invested in C++ after all.

    They don’t want to sell rust. It’s not a money maker for them.

    • bluGill@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      The article is clear that this is about C# not C++. Is the romance for managed languages wearing off - I wonder what issues they are seeing.

      Microsoft is big in C++, but they are also pushing C++ to be a lot safer. Modern C++ isn’t as safe as rust, but it is still much safer than C or C++98.

      • notriddle@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Tail latency and memory usage?

        It’s hard for me to come up with any other big advantages that Rust has and C# couldn’t easily lift.