> It is always a game of trade offs. Safety/correctness, speed of development, […] Where's the trade-off? If the result is buggy crap and/or a security nightma

> It is always a game of trade offs. Safety/correctness, speed of development, […] Where's the trade-off? If the result is buggy crap and/or a security nightmare it makes no difference whether it was "fast to develop". Saying something like that is like saying that you could build houses much faster if you just didn't have to follow any safety regulations. If you would try that in the real world you would end up in jail sooner or later. But in the virtual world of software people really seem to think that such an "argument" is valid. I'm eagerly looking forward to the EU finally (and hopefully soon!) removing the liability exceptions that are still in place for software. It's in the working. Than software products would fall under the same liability laws than any other products, and vendors going to be finally full responsible for what they ship to customers. The whole "I don't care about safety and correctness because there are no consequences" madness would come to a very abrupt end in case vendors would be liable and could end up in court easy for shipping subpar products that were manufactured not adhering to state of the art practices. > […] performance of applications. Rust and C are the same in this regard. So no "trade-offs" here.