Hopefully Contracts and better tools will lower some of the costs of better safety.   -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von:JOHN MORRISON via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> Gesendet:Di 25.02.2025 21:59 Betreff:Re: [std-proposals] A non-owning but self zeroing smart pointer for single ownership An:std-proposals_at_[hidden]; CC:JOHN MORRISON <inglesflamenco_at_[hidden]>; Hi Simon,   It is a discussion that needs to be had and is being had. There is talk of making subscript array access bounds checked by default. That is paying for what you don't use (if you code correctly) just to get safety (a slap on the wrist) if you don't . The need for safety has become a more anxious issue and the hit on performance is low. That is why cars have airbags. They didn't used to when we were strongly focused on just getting them to work but then after lots of accidents with them we became focused on making them safe. The same with C++.   This isn't the place to have a defining discussion on this but it is correct to acknowledge that it is there and make reference to it when assessing this proposal, its design priorities and safety obligations.   Cheers, John.