3 ms·
Seems other way around. Since you can focus more on other security issues instead of memory safety and other security.
by timeon 2y ago
Seems other way around. Since you can focus more on other security issues instead of memory safety and other security.
- amelius 2y agoNo, because the memory safety part comes at a cognitive cost. You may be right if you're talking about a GC'ed language, which gives memory safety and at the same time frees up the developer's mind. But if you're talking about constructs like borrow checkers then they do add cognitive load that is perhaps better spent elsewhere.