> C is so primitive. It has a poor type system, it has no sum types (enums, in rust), no closures, no type inference, no bound checking even though it was already known to be beneficial,
computational speed mattered.
compilers needed to be fast.
bounds checking is not really in the ballpark of "advancements in CS".
C could easily become a better language and evolve, the problem is it needs to maintain the billions of lines already written valid.
OTOH there were better languages already when C came out, C won in large part because it was simpler, smaller and a better ASM than ASM.
Rust is a safer language, the problem is once we rewrote everything in Rust, Rust will be as legacy as C and new languages with better features enabled by the orders of magnitude faster chips will be available.
It's like when young people blame the older people, forgetting that they will be old too one day and that in most part life is keeping going on evolving things at a very slow pace, because inertia is the strongest force in societies.
computational speed mattered.
compilers needed to be fast.
bounds checking is not really in the ballpark of "advancements in CS".
C could easily become a better language and evolve, the problem is it needs to maintain the billions of lines already written valid.
OTOH there were better languages already when C came out, C won in large part because it was simpler, smaller and a better ASM than ASM.
Rust is a safer language, the problem is once we rewrote everything in Rust, Rust will be as legacy as C and new languages with better features enabled by the orders of magnitude faster chips will be available.
It's like when young people blame the older people, forgetting that they will be old too one day and that in most part life is keeping going on evolving things at a very slow pace, because inertia is the strongest force in societies.