There will never be a true successor to C since C is "high level assembly." The lack of pointer checking, unsafe casts and non-existent bounds checking aren't an oversight but by design! Assembly doesn't have them so neither does C! There's no reason to whine about it.
The real problem is that people are using C for the wrong reasons. C is for the development of operating systems and low-level code, not applications.
Zig is more modern but anything that does even one iota more of hand-holding or has anything that looks like a guardrail fails the test.
If you want to write applications use Pascal, Java, C#, Swift or Go.
It's useful, but systems programming languages shouldn't be used to create applications in the first place.
We're trying to solve a problem that shouldn't be solved. We're continuing and even confirming the usage of systems programming languages for application development.
You didn't answer nor apparently read my question. You can just answer it in whatever terms you consider some piece of software to be an application when you say "systems programming languages shouldn't be used to create applications in the first place."
hn_submit · · focus · HN ↗
The real problem is that people are using C for the wrong reasons. C is for the development of operating systems and low-level code, not applications.
Zig is more modern but anything that does even one iota more of hand-holding or has anything that looks like a guardrail fails the test.
If you want to write applications use Pascal, Java, C#, Swift or Go.
monocasa · · focus · HN ↗
hn_submit · · focus · HN ↗
We're trying to solve a problem that shouldn't be solved. We're continuing and even confirming the usage of systems programming languages for application development.
boomlinde · · focus · HN ↗
hn_submit · · focus · HN ↗
boomlinde · · focus · HN ↗