I must admit that I’m disappointed with this article. It’ fairly standard “why isn’t X used in a field A” and the answer is: we’ve always used Y, so all libraries and tooling assume Y, and things are slow to change around here anyway. There is nothing specific to Rust, and the only semi-specific thing to embedded programing is noting the reliance on vendor provided libraries. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was generated by ChatGPT.
gotta agree with that, all the points in the article are pretty standard and could be made for any “tool adoption” in any setting
ChatGTP won’t make claims such as “Rust is an exciting language, and I expect it to gain market share slowly. However, I expect more teams to adopt C++ than Rust over the next half-decade.” but will use a lot more weasel words haha.
As for the argument being “it’s not standard”, it’s dull but quite true
