> The reason people cite memory safety as a feature of Rust over C++ is because you get it for free Nothing is free, language design is an exercise in compromi

> The reason people cite memory safety as a feature of Rust over C++ is because you get it for free Nothing is free, language design is an exercise in compromise. OP might need to calm down a bit with the aggressive language, but underneath all that there is real message from people using (trying to ?) use modern C++ : The added safety you mentioned can 1) be really well approximated using modern C++ technics, 2) addressed by really well engrained coding standard and practice learned and known for a long time and doesn't apply for the in the unsafe part of rust that some of the libraries have to use. But i doesnt come at the cost of reduce expressiveness in the safe part of language, slower compiler time and high learning curve.