The way I see it, rust's "safety" arguments provide endless fuel for justifying NIH efforts and enabling the always more appealing creating new problems vs. res

The way I see it, rust's "safety" arguments provide endless fuel for justifying NIH efforts and enabling the always more appealing creating new problems vs. resolving existing ones (aka rewrites vs. inheriting+maintenance). That's not to say it never makes sense to rewrite, but we need to at least be cognizant of these constant forces and normalize the justification on a case-by-case basis accordingly. Although, at this point, it might just be a matter of getting these projects maintained by the new guard who seems to have little interest in writing C. By letting them rewrite the world in rust, they hopefully take ownership and become the old guard living with that syntax until the next generation shows up and wants to rewrite it all in some newfangled safe-C because rust is too hideous to read. I digress...