I was deeply saddened by the vote the article refers to that effectively excluded Sean Baxter's Safe C++. It felt like a push that prevented tabling the solutio

I was deeply saddened by the vote the article refers to that effectively excluded Sean Baxter's Safe C++. It felt like a push that prevented tabling the solution at all. If Safe C++ had been debated on its merits, that would be one thing, but this seemed (to me) to prevent ever getting to that point. Who knows if that was the intent: the result is what disappointed me. In my view, one of the major compiler vendors needs to take on Safe C++ and start supporting it... with refactoring tooling to get a codebase there. Because as this article says, tooling is key.