>>106472282
>D already does this in debug builds and in @safe code.
>Rust is the Concord of programming languages, trying to fix problems that don't exist.
I would say that more D than Rust.
Rust is pretty focused on what it does. It is meant to be a systems programming language that is as fast and safe as possible. And memory safety is an important problem to fix. It's why Java and Ada got popular in the first place and it's root of like 70% of CVEs.
D on the other hand tried to do everything all at once. No one needed a language that is both GC and non-GC, both safe and unsafe. Yet D comes to offer a solution to a problem no one had. And by doing so it became extremely mediocre at everything that people do care about. That's why it didn't got any traction.

>It is therefore safe to assume Rust's raison d'être is political, in despite of the fact cppcon couldn't be more inclusive if they tried to.
What? Cppcon is full of trannies