... but the details are very, very different. Unless I've missed significant revisions, data races and concurrency are a non-goal of the Core Guidelines, but are central to Rust.
That said, I always welcome tooling to make C++ safer; the end game is making programs better, not language partisanship!
I will say this for C++: post C++11, it’s one of the few languages in widespread use to have an explicitly defined memory model. The people working on C++ definitely do care about concurrency and parallelism. I’d still choose Rust over C++ for that kind of program any time I was given the choice, though. =)
Absolutely, I'm not saying they don't care; it's that solving that problem is an explicit non-goal of the GSL work. The C++ committee is clearly working on concurrency related things, I was reading the various coroutines TSes recently in fact, as we're working on similar things in Rust.
SaferCPlusPlus[1] is the library that's probably closer to Rust "in spirit and intent". And more importantly, safety effectiveness. And it does address the data race issue.
That said, I always welcome tooling to make C++ safer; the end game is making programs better, not language partisanship!