Bazel streamlines the build process with native code (C++/Rust) in Python, making the experience a breeze. However, the drawback is that you would need to transition to Bazel.
Or maybe that was for python (e.g. compile CPython along with any ffi modules as one) + .zip file with classes.
In any case, even if above was not 100% true, it's doable with system like bazel/buck/etc., and still allow you for smooth incremental development (or say in the default "fastbuild" .so files may still be used - locally, but in "opt" the full static link, or through a --config)
I think a lot of smaller (read: most) companies adopt bazel without realizing this. You will pay dearly in terms of developer experience in exchange for the benefits bazel purports to offer.
Positives: your IDE experience becomes native and you don't need to interact with bazel for normal IDE work flows. Negatives: need to run the generate script anything non native changes. Also need to deal with bazel build files etc for the git workflow, obviously.
We're small company, and this method has worked great, and we have a pretty complex build with python accessing rust and java (via jni). Java accessing rust and c (via jni).