Ownership is a time-wasting idea; an object should be freely able to go anywhere in the program you need it to go without any concerns.
There are almost no application domains in which you need to conform to some insane borrowing protocol for the entire software.
Your analogy is stupid beyond belief; and terms of the safety of the circuit itself that is behind the outlet, yes I can plug in anything without worrying there will be a fire in the wall. I live in the first world, where we have electrical codes and circuit breakers.
You can't plug a device that pulls 10kW into a plug and have it work, because the circuit breaker stops you from overloading your circuits. You can't plug in a device that attaches the live to your left hand and the neutral to your right, immediately stopping your heart, because such a device is forbidden by electrical codes, and everyone who makes electrical devices has to follow these.
Or, else, what is your point?
Leaks are not a security concern (besides DOS attacks).
In both cases, it should be clear to you that you are behaving in a possibly dangerous manner, that you should know what you're doing and that you are responsible for not endangering others with whatever you're doing.
Making safe things unsafe: rusterfuck.
For some software (eg browsers, operating systems), time spent making our programs correct and fast is worth the effort.
Good luck with a browser without javascript.
> Ownership is completely inadequate for operating systems.
The linux kernel is adding rust support as a first class language. In time I wouldn't be surprised if large parts of the linux kernel were written in rust. Obviously linux will always have a lot of unsafe code, but unsafe is part of rust too. Its surprising how infrequently you need it.
[1] https://security.googleblog.com/2023/01/supporting-use-of-ru...
Borrowing Through Faith
Rust Prevails!
You basically just have to readjust their blinders.
What on earth constitutes "recent" language and where did you se me mentioning "resent"? Anyways, does C++17 qualify? What about PHP8, ECMAScript of latter editions, newer versions of C#, Java etc. etc. ?
If I understand your thinking correct let me help you with your question: what native high performance language with no GC, memory / lifetime management and with the stable release after 2015 is used by all large tech companies. Nice try.
Also what FAANGs do with their choice of tech is their own worries. They have needs that will never be encountered by majority of the rest of the world's programming.
No, language versions are not languages.
> If I understand your thinking correct let me help you with your question: what native high performance language with no GC, memory / lifetime management and with the stable release after 2015 is used by all large tech companies. Nice try.
I meant in general, which languages that were created in the last 20 years are used by all big tech companies.
> Also what FAANGs do with their choice of tech is their own worries. They have needs that will never be encountered by majority of the rest of the world's programming.
I was arguing that Rust is popular since it has quite a bit of adoption, as demonstrated for example by it's usage by big tech. Also, no, there is a dire need for good systems languages.