If you needed any more evidence that memory safety is the future...

[Dukc via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 24 February 2017 at 15:15:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> Chainsaws are effective, but dangerous. So you should have both 
> training and use safety equipment. Training and safety 
> equipment is available for C-like languages (to the level of 
> provable correctness), and such that it doesn't change the 
> runtime performance.

With chainsaws, those are probably provided if you use one 
professionally. But an average Joe getting his firewood from his 
small personal wood plantation is somewhat unlikely to have both. 
I don't how common chainsaws and their usage are among 
non-professionals elsewhere, but here they are common.

The same thing applies for programming languages. A pro might be 
able to verify safety of C with some LLVM advanced tools or 
whatever, but not all coders are experienced nor skillful. For a 
team with lots of such members, using a language in such manner 
is too elitist. Too many things to learn and care about, and thus 
won't be done. And you can't have code being done only or even 
primarily by the best only, because the less advanced need 
experience too.

That's not to say chainsaws or C should be banned. But it's to 
say that the less extra effort safety requres, the more effective 
it is.