Using language age as a definition of success isn't really being fair. Plenty of very successful languages took a long time to gain traction. For instance, Python was in a very similar position to Rust for almost 15 years before it finally started to shoot up into what it is today. In 2000 you were considered eccentric if you chose to use Python for anything but the most dirty scripts, but now it's being used for complex production systems.
I'm not blind. I can see that Rust has its major downsides, and the zealotry you see is on HN and elsewhere is downright annoying. But dismissing it based on age is being disingenuous. There was another list of projects elsewhere in this comment thread which listed a number of things being used in production that can't be considered half-finished by any measure.
I'm not blind. I can see that Rust has its major downsides, and the zealotry you see is on HN and elsewhere is downright annoying. But dismissing it based on age is being disingenuous. There was another list of projects elsewhere in this comment thread which listed a number of things being used in production that can't be considered half-finished by any measure.