To a first approximation, every single one of those wouldn't happen in a memory-safe language.
Of course, plenty of other things will. But it's not like choosing memory-unsafety makes those other things less like (memory unsafety does not, for instance, prevent incorrect ACL specification), so that's not very compelling.
Think of it this way. Suppose C didn't exist, and somebody proposed a new language today that was memory unsafe. Would it have any success, or be laughed out of existence?
In fact, go ahead and suppose C did exist, because it would still not be taken seriously.
If it's so wonderful that C is memory-unsafe, where's all the new languages that are also memory-unsafe?
(Note having specially-called out "unsafe" operators does not make a language "unsafe" the way C is.)
To a first approximation, every single one of those wouldn't happen in a memory-safe language.
Of course, plenty of other things will. But it's not like choosing memory-unsafety makes those other things less like (memory unsafety does not, for instance, prevent incorrect ACL specification), so that's not very compelling.
Think of it this way. Suppose C didn't exist, and somebody proposed a new language today that was memory unsafe. Would it have any success, or be laughed out of existence?
In fact, go ahead and suppose C did exist, because it would still not be taken seriously.
If it's so wonderful that C is memory-unsafe, where's all the new languages that are also memory-unsafe?
(Note having specially-called out "unsafe" operators does not make a language "unsafe" the way C is.)