This was more of an experiment for myself as a point of argument against people who are die hard C/C++ fans. This is only one demographic but it has its obvious winner. I do agree Rust has its difficulties but it is very much a winner in my book. Compile time error detection is amazing. Once you get your head around ownership it seems second nature. Some thing elude me but I also have taken a step back from Rust for a while.
Rust, because safety and easy threading, bundled with an awesome package management. Seriously, just
cargo installor download andcargo build, and stuff will work magically.For C/C++, there is a lot more work included. Even when using CMake, you have to download dependencies, set up paths, and even then, the build might break or the application was written for Windows, but you are on macOS. Yeah, there are other package managers, like Nugget, however they are a pain and even more trouble than downloading and running CMake.
By the way, the comparison is unfair, because Rust takes lessons learned from other languages, like C and C++ and improves on them. They implement studies of the past decades. So of course, Rust would be the better choice.
Even then, there is one argument against Rust: Because it enforces safety via compile-time checks, it takes a lot of discipline and time to learn and use the language. It has a very very steep learning curve, even more than C, which today is the most feared language at Universities :D So I wouldn't recommend it for programming-beginners. It's easier to go deeper abstraction-level by abstraction level (e.g. C# -> C -> Rust)