IMO this kind of just moves the goalpost from "prove the program never panics" to "prove the program never hits the `None` or `Err` path" which is functionally

IMO this kind of just moves the goalpost from "prove the program never panics" to "prove the program never hits the `None` or `Err` path" which is functionally identical in most use cases. Obviously I am not suggesting that people use `arr[i]` everywhere and try to catch the panic, this is an antipattern -- use `.get(i)` if you don't know the bounds. I'm just talking about for the purposes of program formal verification. Aside: I think the language design team making the most terse `arr[i]` code not need unwraps or anything was the right move. Doing `.get(i)?` or `.get(i).unwrap()` all over the place is too much visual clutter. If the user really wants, they can make a custom slice wrapper that implements the `Index` trait in a way that returns `Option`.