OK fine
> 09 Aug 2023
huh? the correct answer to this question should be "get a time machine and go back to 2003 or something. why people insist on carrying on with C in the face of its glaring issues is beyond me. I am not advocating for any specific language, because several other languages are around that might be a better fit. Rust, Zig, D, Nim, Go. just please let C die already.
nope. they all are. all depends on the use case. if your use case is "must do 100% of what C can do, no exceptions" then of course that leaves one option. but for many programmers the trade offs today are not in favor of C, and haven't been for some years.
If you need to target very tiny boards, none from that list are suitable C replacements, _maybe_ zig and D with betterC since they both provide an inline assembler
Otherwise we'll end up with companies using Raspberry Pi 4 for their fleet of scooters because "i can run nodejs on it" (hyperbole, but you get the idea) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37016842
The smallest one was an ATTiny 13A (64 bytes of RAM).
> The smallest one was an ATTiny 13A (64 bytes of RAM).
It counts, but at that point (64bytes of RAM) there is no benefit to using Rust.
I don't see this as a place where Rust can't replace C (or where Zig is a better replacement, or whatever) because why are we writing any high level language at all?
I guess it can make sense if there's a device family and this is the smallest of a range.
Most people and companies cant delay new features and bug fixes for years with the excuse of “we’re rewriting the thing in $currently_trending_language”
by your definition, is that any language less than 50 years old?
Apparently since the Morris worm (1988), it took a while to undestand what kind of features C was capable of.