@nigger @Suiseiseki @bonkers

> bounds checking is the exception

No, it's an example. There is no such thing as a zero-cost abstraction.

> but use after free and so forth are not resolved with runtime overhead.

Yeah, you can do this in C; I wish the people that *wanted* to do this in C would fuck off to Rust because they are awful and they've been trying to ruin C since they decided that dmr's input was unnecessary.

> No, the libc thing was with regards to haskell etc.

The fuck?

"Any safety guarantee rustc makes is also made by ghc" has nothing to do with garbage collection, libc, et cetera.

> it has to actually be used, and it isn't.

Player skill issue.

If you presume from the beginning that you will have fucked up the architecture, whatever. It's used literally everywhere. Maybe it isn't used in *your* shit because, as previously noted, you are performing oral sex on dogs in Quantico instead of understanding the machine.

> it is memory safe without reference counting.

Doesn't matter.

> well, the authors of all the software that uses clang instead of gcc because it's not headed by a greasy jew who sabotaged his own project so it would be useless to any dev other than himself.

No, Apple wanted to gape your asshole and you see this as an advantage.

> my emacs config framework

emacs user.

Your configuration has a framework.

A framework.

"Configuration framework".

Do you wear gloves and a condom to take a piss?

There are like a dozen emacs forks and you use the GNU one but you stick it to Richard M. Stalin by using Apple's C compiler and there is a racial component somehow. I don't know what I'm supposed to do with this information.