It’s just ridiculous to call someone a bad programmer over memory bugs.

By your own words you are definitely a bad programmer if you have ever written more than 1000 lines of code in low level programming language, because there is simply no way you haven’t made an error. You just don’t necessarily know about it, which in my opinion makes you a worse developer, especially with this ancient and destructive mindset.

There is nothing wrong with being a bad developer, we are all bad developers if we don't understand what we are doing

We have the tools to eliminate memory bugs already

Forcing people to use a language with a buitin sanitizer/babysitter that runs everytime you compile your code and as a result makes you wait 10+ minutes between each line of change is dumb

Expecting your code to be bug free because the code written by someone else told you so is also dumb

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/38899

who to trust in that case?

--

educate and trust developers, use tools to audit your code when needed

Sanitizers can only show you some memory problems that happen during a given runtime with given data.

And your 10+ minutes baseless assumption is just demonstratively false. In the default debug mode it is literally instant with human perception on my current, not small project. Longer compiles only happen in release mode or when you introduce new dependencies.

Shall I link you to Valgrind bugs as well?

> And your 10+ minutes baseless assumption is just demonstratively false

Ok, not 10+ minutes, more like 6 minutes on a beefy machine:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR2WDBMjkh8&t=976s

> Shall I link you to Valgrind bugs as well?

See, you fail to understand the point

As was already stated, sanitizers catch a subset of issues and rely on test coverage. Sanitizers have been in use by projects for years, with lots of money spent on fuzzing and test coverage, and there are still numerous issues.