All the evidence is against you here, sorry. Just read the google or microsoft security blogs, linux kernel mailing list, or any of the published security research about bug density in Rust vs C++.

Or you can bury your head in the sand while the rest of the industry is moving on, I guess.

This post is basically a massive projection. When I guess, I make my guesses explicit. You, however, consistently make guesses and pretend they are true. You misinterpret facts so you can conveniently fit them into your narrative.

I don't want "To Be Right", I just don't want dunces slopping nonsense into this comment chain. Not my fault you fall into that group.

I don't need to assume Google's intentions and goals here. I want to see what they've done and the results they've reached with each action. I want to learn. You just want to reaffirm your delusions, that's why you have to pull the "you will learn" card rather than show objective metrics. If you really cared about quality, you would have them ready to present. Given that you haven't and even avoided doing so, it's safe to assume, as most of us have learned through experience, this to be a case of placebo at best. And placebo is not the sign of a good programmer.

Next time, provide some actual data rather than vague self-gloating. Then, we can have a discussion.