Comment by Ygg2
13 hours ago
> The entire point is that being so absolutist is silly.
You're misinterpreting what Rust people are telling you.
- Rust is safe lang
- Nah, C is safe if you're good
- Rust evangelical gestures towards billions or CVEs brought on by overly-sure C programmers
- Yeah, well, a version of Rust was unsafe for few months ten years ago. Besides Zig prevents more bugs than C and is the successor
- Rust person points to Bun's abysmal record
- Stop being absolutist.
The issue is that in C or Zig few people can write mostly UB free code. In Rust anyone can write UB free code as long as they don't reach for unsafe.
It seems odd to me to put this much effort into misunderstanding what people are saying. You just end up talking past everyone, essentially talking to no one about nothing.
If it wasn't obvious from my ramble, Rust concerns are pragmatic, not absolutist. The only absolutism is that for memory safety to be truly upheld, you can't half-ass it (Zig) or ignore it (C).
Some properties are like that.