Rust has a lot of great qualities that C++ lacks, but comparing `rustc` to `gcc` or `clang` on move-semantics checking is just kind of silly these days. `rustc` has `clang-tidy` built in.
`clang-tidy` is not letting you mutate or even access that moved-from "suffix" object without throwing an error.
It's annoying that you need `clang-tidy` and ASAN and shit to get comparable runtime safety even in greenfield C++, but that's not why to prefer Rust.
Prefer Rust because of a better traits system and pattern matching and syntax for `Maybe/Either` and a consistent build/library story and a number of other things.
`clang-tidy` is not letting you mutate or even access that moved-from "suffix" object without throwing an error.
It's annoying that you need `clang-tidy` and ASAN and shit to get comparable runtime safety even in greenfield C++, but that's not why to prefer Rust.
Prefer Rust because of a better traits system and pattern matching and syntax for `Maybe/Either` and a consistent build/library story and a number of other things.