The fallacy is the idea that a Rust implementation would automatically achieve the same performance, and not resort to "unsafe" to be competitive, and then be open to exactly the same issues.

Illustrative example: This CVE in a Rust matrix transpose code: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-5gmm-6m36-r7jh

Conceptually, there is not really anything much simpler than a matrix transpose. So how did they manage to create a bug? To make it fast you need simd, which implied using unsafe, and the dimension check to make it safe used unsigned integers that could wrap around. So they same bullshit as in C.

With all the "Claude rewrote X in rust!" posts lately, I'm waiting on the inevitable Linux kernel rewrite post.

Vibe code aside I feel targeted rewrites are becoming more and more justified.

Counterpoint, more than memory bugs exist, and everything's written in C. You're welcome to rewrite in Rust but you'll create countless bugs that aren't memory bugs that mostly already got fixed in the C version. I can't help but think things like fil-C are the most pragmatic route, despite performance costs, for most people relying on programs written in C.