> This subthread is about claims of STATIC checking of memory safety. A panic is not static checking. Perhaps you should read what you respond to. Oh, I read i

> This subthread is about claims of STATIC checking of memory safety. A panic is not static checking. Perhaps you should read what you respond to. Oh, I read it. Rust, and for that matter, the person to whom you are replying, above, never claimed that Rust could statically check array bounds. You created that straw-man. Yes, Rust does use static analysis, as one important method to achieve memory safety, but Rust doesn't require static analysis in every instance for it to be Rust's big step function, or for Rust to achieve memory safety. Yes, certain elements of memory safety can only be achieved at runtime. Fine? But using static analysis to achieve certain elements of memory safety at compile time is obviously better where possible, rather than only at runtime, such as re: Java or Fil-C?