[majewsky]

> We target C99 or C11

C is anything but simple. It looks simple on the outside, then beats you to death with undefined behavior and either overexplicitness (if you don't use macros) or nested-macros hell (if you do). Their choice of C is routed more in the authors coming from the Unix community, not in their desire for simple software.

If anything, they should start with a truly simple programming language. Something like Go minus huge runtime and maybe plus basic generics.

[dkersten]

I was going to say something similar. If you really want a simple system, maybe avoid C and stick with something memory-safe. Overall, I'm not sure what to make of this page. C is simple, git overdid it, etc. Oh ok.

[anderspitman]

I disagree. I think C is simple, but not easy[0]. I actually see explicitness as a sign of simplicity. It makes things obvious. Folks always cite undefined behavior, but I can't recall a single instance over the past 12 years of this causing me a day-to-day problem. I'm sure it does bite people though, I just don't relate personally.

[0] https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy/

[t0astbread]

Or not make a choice about the underlying tech at all because it'll always be simple to some but complex to others.