The source{d} engineering blog covers machine learning on source code, GitHub data analysis and Go tools like a Git library and ORM.
HN links it for its GitHub data analyses and Go tooling; the one comment given here is a general remark on C++ safety, not about the blog.
There have been lots of solutions like "SaferCPlusPlus" over the years. In my view, the real reasons why these have not been adopted widely are (1) aversion to any sort of runtime overhead greater than zero; (2) cognitive overhead of introducing new language machinery, type-level or otherwise; (3) interoperability with existing code; (4) few people want to be the first to adopt these kinds of tools in production due to the perceived risk; (5) denial that memory safety problems are indeed problems.
If you're going for wide usage, I think it's actually easier to start over with a new language rather than to try to graft safety features onto C++. A lot of low-level folks don't realize it, but C and C++ are no longer the behemoths they used to be. If you look at the languages people are switching to rather than just absolute usage share, the usage chart [1] paints a very different picture.
[1]: https://blog.sourced.tech/post/language_migrations/eigenvect_stack_22lang.png