That sounds great, and that's the narrative you constantly hear. Java, .NET are memory safe. BUT: they all have more vulnerabilities on average than C++. So j

That sounds great, and that's the narrative you constantly hear. Java, .NET are memory safe. BUT: they all have more vulnerabilities on average than C++. So just saying, memory safety alone does almost nothing to make a language safe. Why would Rust be so much safer than C++ if so almost all other languages also have memory safety but are on average less safe than C++? Meaning more vulnerabilities (so not only memory safety just to be very clear)