Okay, that is a fair point. I think the difference though is that while C++ indeed mitigated some of the drawbacks of C, it did so while also introducing a huge amount of additional complexity and dubious features, which you could also argue Rust does, but I think not nearly to the same extent.
Hindsight is 20/20. It wasn’t perceived that way back then. Every C++ feature had a well-reasoned rationale of solving an important problem. (I found the book “The Design and Evolution of C++” worth reading, although that was some time ago.) The only handicap requiring compromises was backwards compatibility with C, but that was also a major reason why it became so successful.
I’m sure that Rust will continue to become more complex, and in 20–30 years another systems language will likely come along that is at least as safe while being easier to work with again.
