This is the most insightful comment in the discussion. It should have been obvious, but it wasn't until you posted it.
First, design a sound language that solves problems other languages don't (done). Then, optimize for adoption ... because the world only benefits from that new language once adoption really takes off.
Rust has done half the job really well. And a decent start on the second half -- mainly because the first half was done so well.
But if the Rust team were to prioritze adoption the way the parent post espouses, they'd be changing their priorities significantly, and it's probably the most effective way to make sure Rust fulfills its potential.
We have done a lot of things to prioritize adoption, though we could do better.
We have done some almost-studies like this: we had a series of conference calls with companies using production Rust specifically to work on their pain points, for example.
First, design a sound language that solves problems other languages don't (done). Then, optimize for adoption ... because the world only benefits from that new language once adoption really takes off.
Rust has done half the job really well. And a decent start on the second half -- mainly because the first half was done so well.
But if the Rust team were to prioritze adoption the way the parent post espouses, they'd be changing their priorities significantly, and it's probably the most effective way to make sure Rust fulfills its potential.