So I dug some more, and it turns out that while he does have something to say about Rust, I'm not sure I'm convinced by his conclusion about safety:
"Safety. Yes, Rust is more safe. I don’t really care. In light of all of these problems, I’ll take my segfaults and buffer overflows. I especially refuse to “rewrite it in Rust” - because no matter what, rewriting an entire program from scratch is always going to introduce more bugs than maintaining the C program ever would. I don’t care what language you rewrite it in."
(I think it's a bit mean to downvote me for not knowing that he addressed that point in a separate page of his. He didn't link to this Rust review at all!)
Holy... Believe nothing that guy says. I'll just wait until he releases his first game with network connection and instantly gets a buffer overflow and his game becomes an entry for worms into people's systems.
"Safety. Yes, Rust is more safe. I don’t really care. In light of all of these problems, I’ll take my segfaults and buffer overflows. I especially refuse to “rewrite it in Rust” - because no matter what, rewriting an entire program from scratch is always going to introduce more bugs than maintaining the C program ever would. I don’t care what language you rewrite it in."
From https://drewdevault.com/2019/03/25/Rust-is-not-a-good-C-repl...
(I think it's a bit mean to downvote me for not knowing that he addressed that point in a separate page of his. He didn't link to this Rust review at all!)