> The thing with c++,rust and similar syntaxes, is they are at an absurd and grotesque scale in complexity compared to, for instance, C99 syntax with some bits

> The thing with c++,rust and similar syntaxes, is they are at an absurd and grotesque scale in complexity compared to, for instance, C99 syntax with some bits from c11+ for modern architecture programming (dodging all the ISO tantrums like _generic, typeof, asset on steroid, etc). The syntax is a tradeoff, almost always. For example, without the lifetime type in Rust, compiler cannot identify even in theory, what is the intended lifetime of that specific type and it cannot guarantee that use-after-free will not happen.