Rust also adds value in providing so many of th checks where most languages only have a subset, and being incredibly consistent in having safe defaults.

Not untrue, but the post doesn’t mention prior work, so it’s implying that Rust is one of the only languages that has these features, whereas even C++ (notorious for being unsafe) as a majority of the features (in Clang). Clang can even catch many data race issues with the proper annotations. Maybe it’s ignorance, but given how posts proselytizing Rust tend to get popular on HN, it makes me suspicious that the omission was intentional.

> In addition, most of these checks are provided in other languages or linters for those languages.

Linters are inferior to things the compiler catches for the same reason test cases are inferior: They are not enforced. If the compiler doesn't allow something you can say with confidence you will never see it in the wild. With linters, compiler switches (-Werror) or test cases you'll have no idea.

I would like to see more about atypical language protections. GCC has many underknown flags that protects against very specific things. Kotlin is the first popular language to support structured concurrency, eliminating many classes of concurrency errors. It's basically "RAII" for threads, coroutines.

Tailrecursive and deeprecursive allow for making any recursive function stack-overflow safe.

I guess C# isn't popular.

It is of course but I doubt C# has structured concurrency?