Safe Rust doesn't have UB[1], and safe Rust is what I review 99% of the time. For unsafe modules, you should indeed be running sanitizers. Fuzzers are always good, they are also interesting for other properties than UB.
> tools available that should be run on CI that can catch those issues
Available tools have both false positives and false negatives. Careful review is unfortunately the best tool we had in C++ to nip UB in the bud, IME.
> I think my big productivity issue with rust has always been the very weird hoops I need to jump through to make it do stuff I can confirm is correct but the borrow checker prevents me from doing
Interesting, I remember having to adapt some idioms around caching and storing iterators in particular, but very quickly I felt like there wasn't that many hoops and they weren't that weird. There's a sore point for "view types" (think parsed data) that are hard to bundle with the owning data (I have my own crate to do so[2]), but other than that I can't really think of anything. Do you mind sharing some of the patterns you find are difficult in Rust but should work, in your opinion?
> [rust-analyzer and clangd]
I find there's been tons of regressions in usage in rust-analyzer recently, but IME it blows clangd out of the water. The fact that Rust has a much saner compilation model is a large contributing factor, as well as the defacto standard build system with nice properties for analysis.
clangd never properly worked on our project due to our use of ExternalProject for dependencies.
> And regarding the google report, was that not self reported productivity.
No, the recent report (presented by Lars at some Rust conf) is distinct of the blog article and is not self reported productivity. They measured the time taken to perform "similar tasks", which google is uniquely positioned to do because it is such a large organization.
> Just make an informed decision is my point, you have tradeoffs for each laguage and for me easy C interop is extremely important for the places I actually need C++. For the rest I use golang.
That's fair. I would say the tradeoff goes very far in the Rust direction, but I have strong bias against golang (I find it verbose and inexpressive, I don't like that it allows data races[3])
[1]: to be precise, if safe Rust has UB it is a compiler bug or a bug in underlying unsafe code. By safe Rust, I mean modules that don't have `unsafe` in them.