Chrome is "on track"? Last I remember they had a document explaining why it's not a good idea for them. I disagree with it, and would very much wish for Chrome to ship Rust, but they don't seem to be interested for now.

They're referring to this[0] I believe, which is not glowing, but does seem mildly optimistic. Specifically:

> For now, Chrome investment in Rust will remain a background investigation (mostly directed towards prototyping these tools and techniques). If we become convinced this sort of interoperability is possible, we’ll revisit widespread use of Rust in Chrome

[0]: https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safet...

Yes that's the same document I refer to as well. So nothing has changed. A "mildly optimistic" rejection is a rejection of Rust nonetheless. Rust is definitely not "on track" of being adopted in Chromium. For that you'd need more. Right now it's rather a "we are interested, maybe we'll add it". Also note that Chromium engineers also built some languages themselves that solve some of the same problems that Rust solves: https://github.com/google/wuffs

Right, and their issues there all pertain to interoperability, not to issues with the Rust language and its implementation. They seem to view Rust as production-ready, and a language that would bring relevant benefits to the Chromium project, were it not for the C++ interoperability difficulties.

Looks like this will not happen soon: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/gDA2S...

I think it's weird to blame Rust for that. I don't want to rush to blame Windows 7, but do consider that Windows 7 is massively EOL (2015; extended support also ended early this year) and I would not fault Mozilla for not doing any testing on that platform anymore. I don't think this has much, or anything, to do with Rust.