I am not sure what point you're trying to make. Who are the 'naysayers', and what are they saying 'nay' to? And what do they have to do with anything I commented on?
Anyone that downplays unsafe code blocks as it was a Rust invention, available nowhere else.
Then uses it as argument, that since Rust has unsafe, there is no benefit over using C or C++ with a plain static analysis tool, but a basic one, because they are unwilling to actually use the ones people pay for on high integrity computing certifications.
Your comment to me seemed a bit going towards that direction.
Hmm, no, my comment didn't say any of those things. Specifically, I did not comment on (and do not care if) unsafe blocks are a Rust invention, and I made no comparison between Rust and C or C++.
