> Go for safety. We do not need yet another unsafe language. We have plenty of those. Do we? The only ones I hear about people using are C/++. On the other han

> Go for safety. We do not need yet another unsafe language. We have plenty of those. Do we? The only ones I hear about people using are C/++. On the other hand, safe systems languages seem to end up being forgotten, as people opt for C/++ instead for systems/performance domains. Presumably in part because they use things like garbage collection, giving up some of the more raw control and probably also speed that C/++ provides. It really seems that any language that wishes to challenge C/++ on their own turf needs to offer the power of C/++ as far as it is possible. In Rust's case, that is possible as long as you're being explicit about where the safe interfaces end and the unsafe ones begin.