Re: Hold your horses!
But, you are doing the same thing, only in the other direction. The statements in the article about "less vulnerable" are correct, as is your statement that Rust does not make programs fully secure. To me, it seems like you are deliberately trying to downplay the advantages of using safe languages like Rust. The benefits are real - such usage *will* make many (most?) programs less vulnerable. Not completely invulnerable of course, but definitely LESS vulnerable.
There are other types of gotchas in most languages. One that I found a couple days ago in my C code is years old:
wrong: ... 1 << n ...
right: ... 1ull << n ...
(64 bit compilation)
If I recall correctly integral literals in Rust are u32, so the same problem exists there.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
