> Developers who become over-reliant on the compiler’s safety checks may inadvertently write poorly architected or buggy code, believing that the language’s saf

> Developers who become over-reliant on the compiler’s safety checks may inadvertently write poorly architected or buggy code, believing that the language’s safety features will catch more than they actually do. First off: the type system of Rust is very good. Concurrency is mostly absolutely fearless (as advertised), but Yes, there are still footguns. There are not more footguns than in other languages though. So while the idea that psychologically it could be that people make more mistakes of another kind, because they think that the "magic of Rust" will guard them could indeed exist, I still prefer the help I get to no help at all. If the same developers were to write e.g. C I am 100% sure they would make more mistakes.