
Have to wonder....
I have to wonder whether the increase in programmer productivity is in part due to much smaller Rust teams than the "huge" C++ teams. The rather obvious observation that the latest and greatest will attract the more talented whereas the older technology is more likely to attract and retain the plodders and would be careerists.
Anyone, programmer or not, who claims a chunk of code is "more correct*" probably hasn't understood. At best its likely to be less incorrect. It either satisfies its specification over its full domain☆ of application or it doesn't.
The heffalump in the room is that a lot of code is developed without anything remotely resembling a specification.
Rust looks like it would be more amenable to the application of formal methods and the last time I looked there appeared to be a fair bit of activity in this area.
Automatic memory management (garbage collection) does provide much of the memory safety of Rust and in many contexts is, I suspect, much less burden on developers to use languages like Go.
* even leaving termination aside and only considering partial correctness.
☆ restricting the domain to where specification does apply could induce an ordering on correctness - the larger the restricted domain the "more" correct I suppose.