> I feel like the crux of your argument here is that because C is 50 years old and research into programming languages has occurred in that same 50 year period that C is now automatically bad.
>
> What if there's nothing wrong with its intended purpose?
So is it your position that C is the pinnacle of systems programming languages? That no significant improvement in PLs has been made... that could ever be made?
I'm a Rust fanboi, but I totally get why some people don't like it. And why many people believe that something better (in one or more different directions) is possible. Or that something else would an even better fit for Linux kernel development.
If the formally proven stuff gets more traction, I'd likely jump ship to something like that. Though a lot, lot of work needs to be done there, especially when talking about interacting with hardware... such a headache. But if our base computing infrastructure could be proven to be correct (hardware and software), that could dramatically improve the entire software ecosystem. There would still be problems, but if we can at least move them up a level or two in the software stack, we have an easier time finding and fixing them. This is the difference between the Spectre attack and leaving the permissions for a password file wide open.
I don't know what a better future is going to look like exactly, but I know that we're not going to get there with just good old C code.
So is it your position that C is the pinnacle of systems programming languages? That no significant improvement in PLs has been made... that could ever be made?
I'm a Rust fanboi, but I totally get why some people don't like it. And why many people believe that something better (in one or more different directions) is possible. Or that something else would an even better fit for Linux kernel development.
If the formally proven stuff gets more traction, I'd likely jump ship to something like that. Though a lot, lot of work needs to be done there, especially when talking about interacting with hardware... such a headache. But if our base computing infrastructure could be proven to be correct (hardware and software), that could dramatically improve the entire software ecosystem. There would still be problems, but if we can at least move them up a level or two in the software stack, we have an easier time finding and fixing them. This is the difference between the Spectre attack and leaving the permissions for a password file wide open.
I don't know what a better future is going to look like exactly, but I know that we're not going to get there with just good old C code.