I think you are being reductive on your original comment. The idea of cycling planning and implementation is nothing new, and quite used on the other disciplines. Saying that agile is the problem is misguided and pointing to other engineering disciplines for "they do it better" is usually a sign that you don't talk to those engineers.
Of course we can plan things better, but implementation does inform planning and vice versa and denying that is denying reality.
I don't think this is productive, since you're so adamant [1] that "big C memory safe programs don't exist." I know for a fact they do. Most of the software you won't ever see. What do you think powers the most critical sytems in, say a fifth gen fighter, or the software that NSA relies on in their routers?
I'll give you a hint. It's neither rust- nor scrum-based. I'd rather change careers or retire than work another day doing scrum standups.
