OP mentioned having used Linux for 4 weeks. If they are interested in learning more about Linux, I feel like even Arch would be a better next step.

I love NixOS and have been using it for over a year at this point but sometimes when things don’t work I feel like I’m banging my head against a wall. I’ve been using Linux for ~7 years now.

It’s not magic, it’s adoption rates. I’m not saying the money or resources are useless, but as it is right now, I think more people would benefit from actually trying to use rust in more large-scale projects (like R4L, windows, android, redox, servo, etc.) and using that experience to inform actual language development. I don’t think it makes sense to do a full revamp of the compiler until projects like those are actually proven. In the meantime it makes more sense to allocate funding/dev resources to those projects (or at least the open source ones)

Someone already did that a bit ago with a bunch of fireworks and I think it worked?

revamp Rust to produce lightweight binaries, have a stable compiler and for it to be way quicker in compilation

It really isn’t that simple though. Rust’s compiler isn’t stable because the language itself is still being improved. This type of thing will only improve as adoption increases and real-world problems get ironed out. You can’t just throw money and devs at it and expect the problem to be solved.

It’s also not like the developers don’t care about compile time, but the nature of the language (strict compiler checks which catch things before runtime) will inherently lead to something slower that other languages’ compilers. There are probably still improvements they can make, but it’s not as simple as just deciding to rewrite/revamp it and expecting massive speedups.

It’s probably the government-subsidized corn syrup but wheat works too