zlacker

>>Philpa+(OP)
This is why I think that C++ will be around in the next 50 years but Rust? I can't tell.

>>twen_t+s7
C is/was fueled by positive energy: "Let's be (relatively) portable and improve on Assembly."

Rust seems to have vengeful victory at its heart: "Let's sock it to those reckless, ignorant C programmers."

>>chilli+F8
It's more like "let's improve on C by catching errors C compilers don't check." Rust took a lot of inspiration from Cyclone, which was meant to be a safe version of C.

Writing C makes certain classes of sloppy assembly bugs unwritable, like accidentally using the wrong calling convention, forgetting to preserve a register, or forgetting to pop something off the stack. Similarly, Rust makes classes of sloppy C bugs unwritable, like using a dangling pointer.

Why do you view that as an attack on C programmers? It's no more an attack on them than C was an attack on assembly programmers.