Most things in the world are not made of zinc. But to therefore say that we live in a world without zinc in production is not a correct conclusion (
https://youtu.be/jWpPrWHBHcQ).
> running in a browser written in C++
As other have pointed out, that browser would not render fonts without Rust. You use your browser without fonts? I mean, it's not impossible. Some people navigate the web using screen readers.
> running on an OS written in C/++
Except the parts that are written in Rust or other languages, sure.
So tautologically, the parts that are not written in other languages, are written in C and C++. That's technically correct, the best kind of correct.
> Whatever higher-level language you use, it's powered by C/++
"Powered by" in that it runs on an OS written in C, assembly, and C++, sure. Still not relevant. Languages tend to want to "self-host".
> Your game engines are written in C/++
Well, most gaming hours in the world are probably spent on games written in C#, Java, Kotlin, Swift, and Objective-C. And JS.
JetBrains 2025 study has 40% of game development as C#. C++ just 29%.
AAA games, sure. But it's understatement of the year to say that because AAA games are written in C++ that means it's the only production language.
> Your fucking car is written in C
I think you're stuck in the past. This is no longer a categorically true statement.
The world changes. It used to be a true statement that "americans don't even have passports". In 1989 only 3% had passports, and the world could mock that figure. Today it's 48% and rising.
Just like you should no longer say "americans don't even have passports", because while the percentage may not be a record, it's no longer true, you should stop saying other things when they are no longer true.
> literally 0% of the software anyone uses being written in Rust.
As I have others have repeatedly proved to you, this is literally (actual literally, not as a rhetorical device) false.
I guess you could live in a world with 0% Rust. Your car is old, your Linux kernel was compiled to exclude Rust parts (not sure this is possible. Haven't checked), and you don't run anything Chromium-based, or Firefox. And you don't own an Android phone.
But you saying (asserting without evidence) that it's only minor systems in these omnipresent systems that use Rust, then… uh… what's your point? In a car, if C controls fuel injection and Rust controls the power steering, does that "not count", and you'd still claim "literally 0%"?
But… like, if you have an iPhone instead, do you think it doesn't run anything Objective-C or Swift?
I think it's accurate enough to say that "Cloudflare runs on Rust".
You think you, and normal people, never use Cloudflare? Cloudflare hosts like a a quarter of web traffic.
A quarter of web traffic runs on Rust. In production. Right now.
> You're talking about how "writing new C in 2026 is misconduct" like it's a relic of a bygone era
Just like with Cobol, in an existing system it does have its place for extending existing code.
But that "new" is key.
> world around you is a world written entirely in C
Entirely? No. Nobody's saying there's no C code in existence. I don't know why you care to defend against that imagined claim.
> rounded to a whole percent, literally 0% of the software anyone uses being written in Rust.
Does it matter, if (say for example) your pacemaker or car ignition runs Rust?
Come back, zinc, come back.