I read through the article and I recognized the pattern of an old C cave bear that refuses to learn new things and understand why safety and type theory matters

I read through the article and I recognized the pattern of an old C cave bear that refuses to learn new things and understand why safety and type theory matters. Lots of arguments made in that post are either unfair (i.e. the Cargo team stuff) or completely wrong. Also, if you think Go is a replacement of C, I think you are not a real systems programmer. Go has a GC, in the first place: how can you seriously state it’s a replacement of C? Also, you didn’t mention it (voluntary I guess), but Rust does have a community-based mechanism to make the language evolve (RFCs). About the number of features, those are mostly non-breaking changes additions. Rust has editions now. Just… do your homework? C++ is mostly used as a OOPL. Rust has no concept of OOP. > Yes, Rust is more safe. I don’t really care. In light of all of these problems, I’ll take my segfaults and buffer overflows. Sorry For Your Loss.