> It concludes by pointing out that unsafe code is unsafe. It spent an awful lot of time on that without making very good points. About one paragraph of text

> It concludes by pointing out that unsafe code is unsafe. It spent an awful lot of time on that without making very good points. About one paragraph of text could have pointed that reducing the surface area of unsafe code is therefore a good thing, which leads to "rewrite it in rust" which gets you more safe code. There also seemed to be a little bit of conflation of safe code with bug-free code which just isn't possible. Arguing English semantics of words which are being used to describe very specific compiler behavior is going to be a GIGO argument.