[pornel]

This doesn't change a thing, because Rust is an answer to Modern C++ still being inherently unsafe and not meeting the bar. The best that C++26 has to offer is below the basic guarantees that Rust shipped in 2015.

This is the blind spot that prevents Bjarne from taking significant steps needed for C++ to catch up. He's still seeing C/C++98 as the problem to solve, while Rust sees Modern C++ as the problem to solve.

[pjmlp]

I do think he does see the actual problem, what he kind of doesn't accept/acknowledge is that in the tradition of "worse is better", most companies don't care what static analysis are out there, and that university professors have no intention to change for teaching C++ as it was taught in the 1990's.

The problem of TypeScript, is that you can still write JavaScript with all the WATs, same applies to any language that tries to be TypeScript for C.

However many of us actually think that Rust is also not the answer for everything, there are plenty of safe languages that could be used instead of C, C++, Rust for plenty of scenarios, and aren't because of cultural issues.