> Counting the lines is not a very helpful metric.
Seems self-contradictory.
And they did say they're working to reduce the unsafe code over time. That huge percentage of memory bugs that they were able to better triage and fix due to the port was also them improving safety.
If you want good metrics, measure functions and data structures without unsafe. Not lines.
I doubt it, as it's possible a substantial amount of those unsafe areas can't even be removed, given the project's dependent on C/C++ libraries. Without proper calibration those metrics won't tell the full story, and with calibration the incentive for the story will decrease over time with the unsafe refactoring. I doubt the distribution of the unsafe code really matters that much; what matters is proper handling, wherever it is, so stability and security isn't compromised.