> C doesn't impose any of these restrictions, largely by virtue of being low-level, and moreover, it should be possible to implement whatever data transforms ar

> C doesn't impose any of these restrictions, largely by virtue of being low-level, and moreover, it should be possible to implement whatever data transforms are implemented in any of those other languages in C as well. You're conflating lack of guardrails & helpers with "low-level". C is not lower level than Rust or C++, not at all. It's just more dangerous, and that danger brings no "low-level-ness" advantages. > it should be possible to implement whatever data transforms are implemented in any of those other languages in C as well. Define what you consider "possible" here. There's a bunch of things I'd consider "not possible" in C that you can do trivially in C++/Rust, such as the codegen templates & coroutines perform, for example. If you throw enough macro pre-processor hacks at it to the point it doesn't reassemble C in the slightest sure you can sort of pull it off. But is that sort of thing considered "possible in C"? Or have you just made a second language in front of C that happens to compile to C via the hello world of compilers? Even with macros I'm not entirely sure you can actually do something like static_assert in C since you can't put an #error in a macro substitution. Or more practically defining the backing type of an enum