[jmull]

> If we ignore declarations etc. and only consider statement lines that read or write memory, then any such line of Zig (or C, or C++, or any other unsafe language)

Surely it's obvious that's trivially untrue?

Also, literally no code is safe from potential future upstream changes.

Anyway, I'm not arguing zig has the same safety guarantees as rust. That would be silly. But the weird binary thinking around memory safety is equally silly. People want things to be simple, but you really can't come to good conclusions by trying to pretend things are simpler than they are and through a lack of analysis and thinking.