I'm not on the Rust bandwagon, but statements like this make absolutely no sense.

A lot of software was written in C and C++ because they were the only option for decades. If you couldn't afford garbage collection and needed direct control of the hardware there wasn't much of a choice. Had their been "safer" alternatives, it's possible those would have been used instead.

It's only been in the last few years we've seen languages emerge that could actually replace C/C++ with projects like Rust, Zig and Odin. I'm not saying they will, or they should, but just that we actually have alternatives now.

▲

pjmlp an hour ago | parent | next [-]

At least on PC world you could be using Delphi, for example, or Turbo Pascal before it.

Also I would refrain me to list all other alternatives.

▲

vbezhenar 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

One could rewrite curl with Perl 30 years ago. Or with Java, Golang, Python, you name it. Yet it stays written with C even today.

	▲	johncolanduoni 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If you’re trying to demonstrate something about Rust by pointing out that someone chose C over Perl, I have to wonder how much you know about the positive characteristics of C. Let alone Rust.
	▲	avhception 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Your comment comes across disingenuous to me. Writing it in, for example, Java would have limited it to situations where you have the JVM available, which is a minuscule subset of the situations that curl is used in today, especially if we're not talking "curl, the CLI tool" but libcurl. I have a feeling you know that already and mostly want to troll people. And Golang is only 16 years old according to Wikipedia, by the way.