is false because of his admission here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49097258
If “Rust isn’t [memory safe] (because unsafe)”, and “Zig isn’t (because uaf)”, then Fil-C isn't (because zunsafe_call/zunsafe_fast_call).
> If Rust isn’t memory safe (because unsafe), and Zig isn’t (because uaf), then Fil-C isn't (because zunsafe_call/zunsafe_fast_call).
Rust isn’t memory safe (because unsafe) isn't an argument anyone makes, it's that Rust that uses unsafe isn't memory safe!
It's called `unsafe` for a reason dude, not even the Rust people think it's safe.
This is an argument that Fil-C makes, by choosing a very specific definition of memory safety. It’s even stated explicitly in that tweet linked.
But you can see in a number of his public comments statements that Rust is not memory safe by his definition because it has unsafe as an escape hatch. https://x.com/filpizlo/status/2079244258062766177 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49053608 as some examples.