> Why, if C is so bad, wasnt one of the alternatives introduced to slowly replace C in the kernel years ago? There are very few alternatives, and even fewer of

> Why, if C is so bad, wasnt one of the alternatives introduced to slowly replace C in the kernel years ago? There are very few alternatives, and even fewer of them gained much popularity, so Rust is an exception here. Being better than C technically is not enough, you need something that other people want to use (and ideally already use). Kernel is more of a social than technical thing. > if its not Rust it must be broken That's simply true, especially for operating systems. The amount of safety bugs they have is staggering, even after decades of work, and Rust largely fixes that.