> I don't care that it's hypothetically possible for that to happen with C, I care that practically, I've never seen it happen. I don't think your anecdotal ex

> I don't care that it's hypothetically possible for that to happen with C, I care that practically, I've never seen it happen. I don't think your anecdotal experience is enough to redeem the disarray that is C dependency management. It's nice to pretend though. > and tells me the software it could build last week can't be build any more. What. The. Fuck. Cargo, I didn't ask you to fuck up my shit - but you did it anyway. Make has never done that to me, nor has autoconf. If you didn't get my point in previous comment, let me put it more frankly - it is your skill issue if you aren't fixing your crates to a specific version but depend on them remaining constant. This is not Cargo's fault. > Make has never done that to me, nor has autoconf. Yeah, because they basically guarantee nothing nor allow working around any of the potential issues I've already described. But you do get to wait for a thousandth time for it to check the size of some types. All those checks are a literal proof how horrible the ecosystem is. > There have been about 100 language versions of Rust in the past 10 years There's actually four editions and they're all backwards-compatible. > C programmers see very little reason to adopt "newer" C language editions. Should've stopped at the word "reason".