[hsjqllzlfkf]

C is used in situations where choose doesn't have to be reliable - wanna expand?

In my superficial understanding of computers, Linux is the paragon of reliability, so naively I would say that shows that C is good enough. However, in also aware that some instructions don't have such a great view of Linux, but I don't know much.

[musicale]

Linux: written in C, hundreds of buffer overflow errors

Multics: written in PL/I, approximately zero buffer overflow errors

see also: https://www.cvedetails.com/product/47/Linux-Linux-Kernel.htm...

[hsjqllzlfkf]

That doesn't tell me much. Linux is much bigger and more used than whatever multics is. So the fact that more bugs are documented is no surprise.

[Jtsummers]

It should tell you that Linux is not a "paragon of reliability" unless you have a non-standard definition of paragon and/or reliability.

[musicale]

And that many of Linux's severe vulnerabilities were facilitated by C/gcc:

"The net result is that a PL/I programmer would have to work very hard to program a buffer overflow error, while a C programmer has to work very hard to avoid programming a buffer overflow error."

https://www.acsac.org/2002/papers/classic-multics.pdf