[stoplying1]

This is so cringe, to have this conversation constantly continue to crop up on Rust safety discussions when it's built on such an obviously falsifiable premise.

What C project is safe, exactly? You imply that the default almost is churning out safe C, so what projects with "competent" coders is producing vulnerability-less C code bases? I'll not be holding my breath because everytime, there's never an answer. My favorite person who spouts this off has multiple projects that have segfaulted from C memory programming related bugs.

Maybe, like, validate the basics of Rust functionality instead of constantly just casting doubt and aspersions on something while offering really weak defenses of what you justhl happen to be conditioned to.

[ok_dad]

I'm just trying to understand why I would want to use Rust. You Rust people constantly act like dickheads anytime anyone asks questions like I did. If you all are so goddamn sure that it's the best way, then how about not acting like a total asshole to me and point me to some things I can read that will convert me?

You folks are the reason no one likes Rust people and Rust adoption is lower than it should be; try being human for once.

[howinteresting]

With all due respect, I don't know what I could possibly point you to. Rust is just a better language than C or C++. It eliminates many classes of bugs that are pervasive in those two languages. It's a true 10x advancement over mainstream languages of the past. It also has been getting plenty of traction all across the industry, from Facebook and Amazon to small startups and open source projects like the Linux kernel.