It's not much of a trick in the case of Rust. Rust has a "std" library that I guess is the equivalent of "libc", but is far more comprehensive. Rust also has

It's not much of a trick in the case of Rust. Rust has a "std" library that I guess is the equivalent of "libc", but is far more comprehensive. Rust also has a "core" library which is the absolute minimum the compiler assumes. It's well defined, well documented and how you use it is standardised. All C implementations have a similar library. For gcc you get it with -lgcc. But it is not "well defined, well documented, with standardised usage". So I'd disagree with you. I've done it, and avoiding libc for in different C implementations is tricker than Rust.