It's true, but since this is a Firefox project, it is relevant since rust was largely developed for years specifically for (re)writing exactly this kind of code in Firefox.

Except for, you know, the majority of Rust projects which reach the HN front page and don't, like the stories on PopOS, Redox, and the Wild linker from the past day.

> Redox

Any project who's name alludes to oxidation or crustations is a Rust project so its already in the title by default.

There's a hugely popular video game called Rust not written in Rust.

To be fair that video game was released (in early access) during Rust 0.8 - the language was already popular on HN I think, but not as a "you should use this in prod" type of thing.

In fairness, many language/framework communities often have project names that are related or tongue in cheek, and not just to advertise that its x language; Python comes to mind

This is cope. Functionally nobody remembers enough high school chemistry to remember what a redox reaction is, let alone associate that with Rust, and such a naming convention is hardly worthy of the petulant dismissal expressed by the original comment.

And while we're on the topic, more Rust projects on the HN front page that don't mention Rust in the past day were Typst and the Cloudflare thing. Turns out, there's just a ton of good Rust projects out there, to the surprise of clueless HN commenters.

How do you know someone is bothered by headline? They will write comment!

Yeah. Rust, good or bad, affords no special performance advantage for IO performance.

Not innately, no, but the kinds of optimizations they’re talking about batching operations and avoiding copies are certainly safer to make using a memory safe language.

correct, stable, fast <- rust's whole deal is giving normal people a chance of building something that gets you all 3.

I touch rust every day, but you should also mention the priority of those three things are also in that order.

The people who actually wrote it seem to disagree.