Author: Stephan Sokolow
Created at: 2025-11-20 19:19
Number: 167
Clean content: shynur: Perhaps we can wait until the maturity of the following options: C++26: hardening and contract Zig gcc-rs Bear in mind that Zig isn’t aiming to serve the same niche as Rust as far as safety/correctness goes (See How (memory) safe is zig? for comparative details on its design philosophy) and posts like these suggest a worrying attitude toward Rust-level safety/correctness within the groups responsible for steering C++. On “Safe” C++ by Isabella “Izzy” Muerte Safe C++ proposal is not being continued by Simone Bellavia Why Safety Profiles Failed by Sean Baxter I’m having trouble remembering what I bookmarked it under so I can link it, but I’d also add the paper Stroustrup put out within the last few years which, to me at least, felt like a sign that the defensiveness various loud C++ developers feel toward the idea of Rust-like guarantees goes all the way to the top. (Which would be consistent with what On “Safe” C++ lays out.) I remember it being longer than A call to action: Think seriously about “safety”; then do something sensible about it .
