[overgard]

C++ programmer here. I've looked at transitioning some of my code to Rust; not particularly out of a dissatisfaction with C++ but more just out of curiosity. I've always ended up deciding against it though, I feel like its safety features just come at too high of a price for the kind of work I do. If I was writing something that needs to be super secure like a web server or something I think it would make a lot of sense, but for most of the things I do memory corruption is relatively easy to avoid with good patterns and a crash just kills a local application. YMMV but I think the "safety" of Rust gets a little overhyped.. most the bugs I run into are not memory safety bugs.

[dwattttt]

The safety aspects do get very hyped. It's better to consider the language strict about correctness; memory safety falls out of that, but so does other stuff, like less logic bugs.

[pjmlp]

Thing is, this is from someone that likes Rust, but for various reasons has to reach out to C++ when going outside my daily use of managed languages, while C++ will never be as safer as Rust, there are many tools to get us half way there.

The big problem is that many projects keep ignoring those tools, the way Zig sorts out reporting use after free errors, the same solution exists for C and C++ for about 30 years now.