I think there's a cause and effect fallacy in that statement. C is a good representation of an abstract computer because alternative representations have died o

I think there's a cause and effect fallacy in that statement. C is a good representation of an abstract computer because alternative representations have died out. C (and very similar imperative languages) keep a strong arm pressure on CPU designers to work well with C. I've spent some time working on VLIW architectures where C is a terrible abstract representation of the CPU's inner workings. Get anything done efficiently was awful and required huge, cumbersome, carefully structured intrinsics. Or raw assembly. Is this is fault of VLIW? Not really. Its mostly the reality of a world that would rather run C code than use VLIW architectures. So we don't have VLIW or other CPU architectures that don't work well with C.