Why do we use C still?
Why do we use C still when there are other languages like Go or C++ or even D? BCPL and B were done away with so quickly, so why do we still use C in our modern society with languages that can do things a lot more efficiently?
1. Everyone has a C compiler, or can write a decent-enough one to support their preferred environment.
2. C is well tested and specified. Reading the standard isn't an exercise is face melting (compare with, say, C++).
3. As a systems language, C doesn't require a runtime library if not needed, and this can be left out very easily (not the case with Go, D, or C++, as I'm aware).
4. C exposes easy trapdoors to the underlying machine (inline assembly, pointers, etc.) that are very handy.
5. C is usable by other languages, as its calling conventions are well documented. This is why C is a preferred base language for things like OpenGL bindings--it's easy to write Ruby, Pyhton, Java, etc. wrappers. This is in sharp contrast to C++, which is brainfucked for things like symbol exports.
6. A line of C is pretty obvious in what it does, when written correctly. You can usually estimate what code it'll generate, barring #define hackery. C++ especially is bad at this.
~
C is still used because it doesn't do a lot, and it nails what it does do.
Do you think I would benefit from Java? Because I don't.
...a critical library has not been ported.
...a really useful language feature doesn't exist, or its implementation isn't appropriate for this application.
...a compiler bug appears and causes days to weeks of torment.
...it's difficult to deploy and distribute the result.
...there are fewer tools, debugging aids, etc.
Languages don't live in a "clean room" environment. All of these things add value even when the language itself is unsound. And then you weigh the cost of rolling new tools, fixing the compiler yourself, etc. against building on the old stuff, and the old stuff wins most of the time. Reaching the opposite conclusion is the exception, and to get there, the language usually has to carve out a niche use-case where it has the best library for a certain domain.
The bad reasons tend to be variations of developer inertia and the inability to decide which features of C++ ought to be used -- arguing against the STL isn't a good argument against C++ as a whole.
C has disadvantages. But many of them are the result of its advantages. Automated garbage collection is great, but garbage collection by hand tuning code gets stuff that AGC may miss.
That said, I'm interested in picking up some of the other languages mentioned.
It seems like the one language that might replace C/C++ in many instances. My favorite feature is the incredible compile times.