A skilled C programmer wouldn't be writing unsafe code anyway, but I can see the appeal of Rust as it sells itself to be more beginner-friendly or "safer" to C.
C is the boomer programming language that just works everywhere and is powerful. Eventually I want to learn it too. Rust is probably not that bad. The community is questionable from what I've heard, some say that it can replace C.
@ehhh@MoeBritannica From someone who absolutely loathes linker error shenanigans with C++ (Partially why I stopped using Visual Studio and used CMake instead, as it handles that stuff for me), my big issue with Rust at least is the amount of boilerplate needed for certain things (like DLL files, for example, if you are making a game mod where the code is contained in a dinput8.dll file or something), and how weird it's include and crates system can be.
But after using C# for a bit with Unity, I like how straightforward it is to use compared to C++. Especially when I see a Unity game ship without IL2CPP (any game shipping with it is immediately a red flag for me), so it's actually possible to do extensive modifications to fix busted game code (For example, anything using FixedUpdate incorrectly, which causes stuttering that cannot be fixed externally).
Rust is neat because it forces the programmer into writing safe code (unless they explicitly prevent it, which in that case 💀). There's already cases where graphics drivers for the Apple M1 on Linux have been mostly written in Rust, and that's commendable.