> It just seems to mean "this language catches more errors at compile time than the previous language I used."
That is a fair interpretation. I've programmed mostly in C# and Java because that's what was required at the time. I also know enough C and C++ to aim at my toes instead of the entire foot. So the comparison is between strongly typed imperative programming languages which are syntactically close to Rust.
Also, I like that Rust isn't OoP, but try to not get baited into that discussion.
That is a fair interpretation. I've programmed mostly in C# and Java because that's what was required at the time. I also know enough C and C++ to aim at my toes instead of the entire foot. So the comparison is between strongly typed imperative programming languages which are syntactically close to Rust.
Also, I like that Rust isn't OoP, but try to not get baited into that discussion.