logoalt Hacker News

Rust is tier-1 language at Microsoft

682 pointsby mmastracyesterday at 1:39 PM436 commentsview on HN

Comments

dismalafyesterday at 6:01 PM

If I were the Rust foundation I'd be keeping this to myself right now.

show 1 reply
mgaunardyesterday at 2:46 PM

does it mean there is a rust.net?

show 2 replies
Alien1Beingtoday at 2:05 AM

Waiting for the deluge of Rust cultists....

okokwhateveryesterday at 7:55 PM

This thread deserves a meme

this_useryesterday at 3:17 PM

Now their broken slop code is at least memory safe.

show 1 reply
shevy-javayesterday at 9:48 PM

Rust is now in the Top Ten of TIOBE. Now, TIOBE sucks, but I found that as a general trend plotted over years, it is not that bad. So Rust is definitely having solid demonstrated use cases in the "real" world.

burakemiryesterday at 4:22 PM

Congrats to the folks involved!

Having previously led Rust at Google, I remember several great cross-company discussions with Microsoft engineers on interop.

Companies with massive C++ codebases use Rust as a pragmatic hedge. C++ as we know it is unlikely to ever become fully memory safe, and unlike C++ standard committee voices who dispute the urgency, major industry players need actionable solutions today.

Because these existing codebases are so vast, Rust must have a viable C++ interop story. However, defining what "good interop" means remains tricky. C++ routinely tolerates aliasing and relies on patterns that violate Rust's aliasing rules. Shared backend infrastructure (like connecting rustc directly to MSVC backends) helps with ABI layout, cross-language inlining, and toolchain parity, but it doesn't solve the core type system divergence.

The fundamental obstacle is type systems:

* Boundaries remain unsafe: Compilers cannot statically verify C++ safety invariants. Crossing the boundary stays in unsafe territory.

* Idiomatic C++ structures often cannot map cleanly into Rust idioms. This forces developers into onerous safety comments or heavy wrapper layers. At some point, application writers will consider serialization / in-process RPC or a full rewrite as a cheaper or cleaner option of getting interop.

Bridging this gap on the ABI level is pragmatic, but pushing Rust's semantics to accommodate C++ edge cases risks compromising "pure Rust" goals. I doubt the broader Rust community will favor complicating Rust's safety model just to smooth over legacy C++ patterns.

To be clear: practical interop is a worthwhile investment, but "seamless interop" needs serious qualification. It will always have hard limits. There will always be friction at the boundary and it will always be a tough sell.

tobin1994today at 8:46 AM

[dead]

TimurRakhmatulltoday at 2:11 AM

[flagged]

cnrcodeyesterday at 3:43 PM

[dead]

marsven_422today at 4:44 AM

[dead]

LazyIDEyesterday at 2:26 PM

[flagged]

sehwyesterday at 6:41 PM

[dead]

grougnaxyesterday at 7:55 PM

[dead]

globalnodetoday at 4:58 AM

Yet another good reason for me to steer clear of the language.

adikshatriyagyesterday at 4:47 PM

crazy i like that

superkuhyesterday at 4:40 PM

I hope this kind of thing means Rust stops making so many rapid breaking changes in th compiler. I've tried it twice, once in early 2021 once 2025. Both times I tried to compile a few random projects I found on the web, stuff like a wordpress fanfic scraper, a software defined radio program, etc.

In 2021 my linux distro I was using had just been released 3 months prior but it's rustc already could not compile 2 of 3 projects due to the use of new features added to rustc in those 3 months. In the SDR case I knew the author and he was able to re-write it in more general rust code and it worked great. In 2025 my linux distro had been out for a couple years. None of the rust projects I tried would compile with my rustc.

Rust, in the past, seemed a very bleeding edge, move fast and break things community. I hope that with more people using it in more places the demographics change and people won't always target latest and greatest. A lifetime for the compiler of at least a few years would make it a very useable language. Adoption at microsoft might help this.

show 2 replies
m3kw9yesterday at 5:27 PM

Good, C# is one of the worst languages there is, hopefully they turn it in to tier 18

hatefulheartyesterday at 7:12 PM

Sephora is tier-1 at the Clown convention

calvbakyesterday at 2:31 PM

This is great! Hope this trend will continue in the future; using a memory-safe language should be a top priority imo in context of the coming rogue AI swarms.

VimEscapeArtistyesterday at 3:33 PM

M$ choosing Rust might be the strongest argument for picking Go instead

show 1 reply
mtgh2syesterday at 2:43 PM

You gotta have balls or be receiving tons of money to publicly celebrate the sloppiest software company of the decade making your programming language Tier 1 internally.

show 1 reply
zapzupnztoday at 12:52 AM

    Embrace.

    Extend.     <-- You are here.

    Extinguish.