So your claim is that sufficiently careful C is just as safe as rust?

Seems like a pretty wild claim to make in the comment thread of this article. Google has some of the most careful engineers in the business. They use valgrind & ubsan & friends religiously. And yet this is their conclusion:

> Our historical data for C and C++ shows a density of closer to 1,000 memory safety vulnerabilities per MLOC. Our Rust code is currently tracking at a density orders of magnitude lower: a more than 1000x reduction.

C is not as memory safe as rust. And it cannot be made as safe as rust with a few bolted on tools and programming tricks.