I’m not sure I agree with that, especially if there were easy wins that could make the world less fragile with a much smaller intermediate effort, eg with something like FilC.

I wholeheartedly agree that a future of not-C is a much better long term goal than one of improved-C.

▲

uecker an hour ago | parent [-]

I don't really agree, at least if the future looks like Rust. I much prefer C and I think an improved C can be memory safe even without GC.

▲

whytevuhuni 44 minutes ago | parent [-]

> I think an improved C can be memory safe even without GC

That's a very interesting belief. Do you see a way to achieve temporal memory safety without a GC, and I assume also without lifetimes?

	▲	uecker 9 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		A simple pointer ownership model can achieve temporal memory safety, but I think to be convenient to use we may need lifetimes. I see no reason this could not be added to C.