Most of it comes down to avoiding shared data. Unfortunately it requires forethought to do that well. There are also many cases where you do want to share data for optimal performance as other options are ultimately too heavyweight.

Also worth noting that an event loop by itself doesn't give you serialization by itself, it can just allow you to gain concurrency without parallelism. You still need some form of serialization by way of something like actors (or async locks).

a rust with gc is already available. it is called c# and runs on all os nowerdays

> Rapid prototyping is almost a meme at this point

> People did this a lot when rust was not as popular but there are plenty of very good rust programmers now who understand the language and can make programs that are significantly more performance for a marginal development cost.

Why isn't the game industry moving to it then? Bc it just cannot compete at volubility with C++, among other things. Yes, you can have skilled people, but the borrow checker is still there and that is an anti-change-me-fast fact of life. I think things like sending batches of info to the GPU in casted ways, alignment, etc. all go against safety naturally but this is fundamentally what needs to be done anyway when transfering data to the GPU, so adding a layer of safety for the sake of doing it to notice that your data-oriented pipeline has to suddenly change its shape would mean repeating work...

Namely, Rust is just not good at this. Rust is good if you can replicate a safe layer that is very reusable every time (when interacting with unsafe) or when you do not need unsafe at all or hardly, where you can take advantage of its safety fully.

Also, there are certain very tweaked data structures such as Boost.MultiIndex or linked lists with intrusive hooks and others that are not easy at all in Rust and they do have value in some situations. I had some of this in some telecommunication systems before.

No, rapid development is essential when you're making games. It's not a "solved science", sure you can code something up and slap some programmer art on it then ship it but you very well know that won't be usable. You need to iterate on the gameplay and gamefeel a lot if you want something more than slop.

One way is sure the native language + embedded scripting language combo but that's got the trap of impedance mismatch i.e. you spend all your time making engine not game then it overruns. But in any case having a way to iterate fast is a hidden productivity superpower, look at how many game studios have Live++ licences on their webpage;)

> Rust is great for rapid protoyping, IMO

If you have to iterate a lot the shape of your code... no, it is not any good at this...

I do think rust works there (as you clearly know), i just like Go's ergonomics for that exact task better, that's all.

Rust is great for GPU programming, or at least for writing the Host (CPU) side without friction. WGPU or FFI-based Vulkan etc bindings for graphics. Cudarc + normal Cuda kernels for general purpose compute. I bring these up as they're easy-to-use and mature.

Yeah, you're still stuck with DSL's there, but not for lack of trying https://github.com/NVlabs/cuda-oxide