I'm not sure why C is blamed in this case when you can do exactly the same strong typing fix in C, and with C99 struct literals it's also not much worse to work

I'm not sure why C is blamed in this case when you can do exactly the same strong typing fix in C, and with C99 struct literals it's also not much worse to work with: typedef struct { size_t size; } PhysicalSize; typedef struct { size_t size; } AllocatedSize; PhysicalSize psize = { 123 }; // or { .size = 123 } AllocatedSize asize = { 234 }; psize = asize; // error ...and in reverse, Rust wouldn't protect you from that exact same bug if the programmer decided to use usize like in the original C code. IME overly strong typing is a double-edged sword though, on one hand it makes the code more robust, but on the other hand also more 'change resistant'. I still would like to see a strong typedef variant in C so that the struct wrapping wouldn't be needed, e.g.: https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3320.htm https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3320.htm