These are all real issues with Rust, though it's worth noting that many of the integration challenges mentioned also apply to external code written in C and C++.
Some of the survey responses highlight one of the biggest hurdles to rust adoption I've experienced though:
Rust has an education problem. People dramatically overestimate the correctness of their [C/C++] code and underestimate the potential severity of failures to meet that expectation. I've found very few projects where a bit of poking can't turn up memory safety issues. Even people who are far more skilled programmers than I am routinely write silly mistakes.
Unfortunately the response I often hear to bringing these issues up after the code exists is "it's working code, why should I care about these theoretical issues?"
Some of the survey responses highlight one of the biggest hurdles to rust adoption I've experienced though:
Rust has an education problem. People dramatically overestimate the correctness of their [C/C++] code and underestimate the potential severity of failures to meet that expectation. I've found very few projects where a bit of poking can't turn up memory safety issues. Even people who are far more skilled programmers than I am routinely write silly mistakes.
Unfortunately the response I often hear to bringing these issues up after the code exists is "it's working code, why should I care about these theoretical issues?"