While the translated code is harder to read, it's much easier to refactor into compiler-checked safe code than the original C. I think doing the translation as

While the translated code is harder to read, it's much easier to refactor into compiler-checked safe code than the original C. I think doing the translation as part of a larger migration from C to safe Rust is essentially the only defensible reason to do it, as it doesn't seem like other reasons can justify the risk of (as one of the sibling comments points out) bugs in the translator and the code being unreadable, aka, in an "unnatural" representation of trying to express C idioms in Rust. That is to say, I don't think humans should be reading or maintaining this code for more than it takes to refactor to be safe(r). (Whether this is how this sort of tool is used in practice is a different question, and one that definitely needs to be considered.)