[tptacek]

If you're talking about the impact of replacing a subcomponent in a larger C/C++ codebase with a memory safe language and saying you'd expect that to make less of an impact on the temporal memory safety issues latent in the remaining C/C++ code, I guess I get that.

If you're saying that you think memory safe languages are less successful at dealing with their own temporal memory safety concerns than spatial memory safety concerns, that doesn't make sense to me and I would push back on it.

[matu3ba]

I do agree with point 1 and with most of point 2 besides some more arcane things like intentionally racy memory access and some write-cache eviction instruction not being properly modeled (in for example Rust).