Far from it. Until Rust can read C++ code seamlessly, there will be more code written in C++ than Rust for the foreseeable future. HPC, Finance, AI, Games, Databases, Hardware all continue to be written in C++.
Like, I agree that C++ will be around for a long while, but the writing is on the wall.
15 years of pre LLM or post LLM ?????
There's no reason to think that current game engines will have their fundamental APIs around scene management, serialization, entity composition, and so on, ported directly to Rust, because these things are typically designed around available language features. For example, an engine written in C++ might have its own version of `dynamic_cast` and RTTI, and that's going to be an extremely awkward design in any other language.
I think 15 years is too high, but I agree that it will be a while, because a triple-A game engine is a huge investment.
Rust's type system is making it's compile times bigger than C, C++ and Zig. This does keep it away from some code that's currently C or C++.
But Rust's type system an borrow checker are not something you want to go without in Rust, while in C++ many codebases prevent the use of some features to reduce compile time right?
“Traditional” C++ looks a lot more like Java, and often like C.
Much of the compile time of both Rust and C++ comes from monomorphization and linking, both of which do a lot of work to support the zero-cost high-level abstractions favored by both languages.
> Rust’s type system and borrow checker are not significant reasons for its compile times
But isn't "hard" monomorphization a property of more complex type systems (generics, type variables, etc.)?