Many more C programs have been verified than Rust programs. Also, Zig's spatial and memory safety is as good as Rust's, so it's not really similar to C at all.

Many more C programs have been verified than Rust programs. Also, Zig's spatial and memory safety is as good as Rust's, so it's not really similar to C at all. The reason it's not "the norm" is that (especially with spatial safety taken care of), not every line is equally dangerous at all. Still, there's no doubt that more guarantees help, but that is only when all other things are equal. If you pick a low-level language for mostly low-level things, so Rust doesn't offer safety for the trickiest code, and furthermore it makes certain things harder to see because the language is more complicated, then things become much less clear. Obviously, when the vast majority of the trickiest, most important code doesn't need to be low-level, Rust would probably be safer on the whole, but in such situations I see no reason to choose either Rust or Zig. You need to choose a low-level language if the core of what you're doing needs to be low-level.