3 stories
The repository claims about 3.5x the speed of idiomatic C++ and 1.1x the best safe Rust on 16 of its own benchmarks. The README credits an AI model with compiler implementation, benchmarking and docs.
The top HN threads: facts from the discussions, both sides, insider voices. Email, Telegram, or RSS.
The author's claim: if a Rust function isn't marked unsafe, it's impossible to use incorrectly in a memory sense, so a memory bug there is always a soundness hole. C and C++ shift that burden to the caller, so the same class of mistake never becomes a CVE.
The thread split hard. One camp: CVE counts are so useless they ignore anyone citing them. Another, channeling Stroustrup: most of these bugs are C-style C++, and modern C++ plus hardened libraries closes the gap.
Embedded veterans call it a great list of what to avoid. Application programmers call it arbitrary hobbling — and one flags the manifesto's printf-over-streams advice as a memory-safety footgun, not a simplification.
The thread's truest line cuts past both camps: everyone agrees a clean subset of C++ exists, and no two engineers agree on which one. In 2026, the unspoken third option, Rust or Zig, hangs over the whole argument.
