[wiggumz]

Jon Evans, master complainer. C could be improved, but the amount of important C code out there (Linux...) militates against adopting a new C. Is someone going to pay to switch over the code base?

Ultimately if a newer, tighter, safer C is going to arise it must come fron the GCC or LLVM people.

Go: owned by google so it's a no-go.

[Intermernet]

> Go: owned by google so it's a no-go.

It's actually an open source project, and many of the core contributors don't work for Google. Just thought I'd point this out as it seems to be a common misconception.

[wiggumz]

And are people expected to download the compiler executable from Google's website?

Given that the CIA recently bragged that they were able to put spyware in iOS apps because they have somehow exploited Xcode on developers' machines, one has to think about the implications of downloading executables from companies that are complicit in spying.

Just because I do something safe e.g. I compiled the compiler myself, it is the larger implication of everyone else not doing it right that is the concern.

[Intermernet]

Or you could compile it yourself from the github repo.

[chris_j]

What is it able Go being owned by Google that makes out a no-go?

[wiggumz]

If it's owned by a corporation that participates in the PRISM program I would not trust them.

[vbezhenar]

Rust can work with C without problems. It misses some low-level things (I can speak of allocators) but generally it should be possible to write Linux kernel driver with Rust for example.