Rust is not a good C replacement
programming.dev

Without any ::prelude and some void* arguments. Maybe you have thoughts about it.

The URL is just a sample of “why” but not “because”.

I have my own preference but will keep it inside my mind to not burn a tornado that will erase me from the matrix of the world.

P.S.: I think C is faster, more powerful, and more elegant. I like it more than Rust.

  • Eheran@lemmy.world
    22·
    10 months ago

    A Rust program written last year already looks outdated, whereas a C program written ten years ago has pretty good odds of being just fine. Systems programmers don’t want shiny things - we just want things that work.

    So if that is all you want, who cares if there are some new features? They absolutely not make it look outdated. If they are crucial you want to implement them in any case.

    rewriting an entire program from scratch is always going to introduce more bugs than maintaining the C program ever would. I don’t care what language you rewrite it in.

    This also seems odd. If the program changed a lot, a lot had to be frankensteined into it. Maintaining that is a fucking mess with tons of bugs. Rewriting can make it so much easier.