And you're telling me... with a straight face... that Java's lack of direct pointer access, automatic memory management and bounds checking do not make it safer and more secure compared to C and C++?
That's obviously not what I wrote, and you would know this had you bothered to read my comment.
I'm saying that such features alone do not actually guarantee safety, if the language's implementation happens to have flaws.
There hasn't been sufficient time and opportunity to see what Swift is like in practice. It's premature to say anything conclusive about it at this point, aside from stating that we don't yet have enough information about it.
The "flaws" discovered in Java aren't in the language, but in the most popular JVM implementations, most of which - surprise - are implemented in C (for the lack of a better alternative).
Writing in Java still remains monumentally harder to fuck up in compared to writing all your code in C or C++.
Furthermore, while Java relies on said relatively complicated interpreter + JIT virtual machine for its execution, Swift has no such virtual machine. All code is analyzed statically and compiled to machine code. The Objective-C runtime which it uses (which is not new - it's the same fucking Objective-C runtime) is a tiny C library, which implements a few basic low-level routines, such as dynamic message-to-method resolution.
So next time it's best for you to shut your mouth if you're ignorant about an issue, than telling people who know better than you to "wait for conclusive evidence".
You really should stop talking.