Thanks for taking the time to point out the obvious to a newbie. Now, that's apparent the point of the article isn't so clear. The point looks to revolve arou

Thanks for taking the time to point out the obvious to a newbie. Now, that's apparent the point of the article isn't so clear. The point looks to revolve around this line: > Eagle-eyed readers might have noticed that this code has no unsafe. Not even a line. That statement is not really true, as the return type (*T) implies the method is unsafe. Oh well, it was an interesting bug hunt story.