What CTOs Actually Said When I Asked About Rust and LLMs

The author surveyed CTOs on a mailing list about language choices for LLM-assisted development, receiving responses in three camps: Rust advocates who value compiler strictness and tooling integration with LLMs, skeptics who argue Go or other languages are better for web backends due to Rust's slow development speed, and Rails proponents who leverage its massive training data corpus. A key insight emerged that LLMs may neutralize Rust's traditional downside of slow development by handling borrow checker complexity, while the quality of language-specific training data significantly affects LLM code output.