you will get better answers to your question, and a more productive discussion in general, if you leave your subjective opinion out of the question.

it’s not fully memory safe (there are some programming languages that are even safer, like Ada)?

for example, you might ask instead “why has Rust gotten widespread adoption, that previous safety-focused languages like Ada did not enjoy?”

this is a big ol’ “it depends”

if it’s a hobby project, then by all means rewrite it if you want to.

if it’s a commercial project of some kind - there’s a business that’s making money, and part of the business making money relies on this code working properly - then rewrites are almost always a bad idea.

read Things You Should Never Do, Part I, an almost 25-year-old blog post (man, that’s a weird sentence to write) about why giant rewrites in a commercial setting are a bad idea.

in general, people greatly underestimate how much work is involved in a rewrite. it feels like it should be simpler to start from a blank slate, and tell yourself you’re going to avoid all the mistakes that you hate with the existing codebase. maybe you’re writing it in a new language, or at least a newer dialect/version of the same language.

if the current codebase is a mess…how did it get that way? lack of engineering discipline? a “just make it work now, we can go back and tidy it up later” attitude towards accumulation of tech debt? if those same attitudes are present on the team doing the rewrite, you’re going to end up right back where you started after the rewrite is “done”.

the main things you need for refactoring to be successful is a) tests, and b) a plan.

the tests allow you to refactor with the confidence that if you break something, the tests will point it out for you. trying to refactor something that lacks tests is the worst place to be in, because you’ll want to add tests, and often adding tests requires refactoring the code to be more testable, placing you in a catch-22.

the plan allows you to make those refactoring changes gradually, over time, while still maintaining the system. in the context of a business that’s paying developers to do this work, the businesspeople tend to look poorly on an engineer coming to them and saying “we’re gonna spend the next year or two doing a big rewrite, so in the meantime you can’t ask us for any new features or bugfixes to the existing system. but once it’s done the new system will be really cool, trust me.”

successful refactoring is a Ship of Thesus - you can replace the entire thing, but you have to do it one component at a time.

when people say “echo chamber” with negative connotations, what they actually mean is “a place that has a consensus reality, and I disagree with that consensus reality”.

a forum for geologists bans flat-earthers. the flat-earthers will call it an “echo chamber”. they’ll ask why the geologists are so afraid to have their beliefs questioned. if they’re so sure the earth is round, shouldn’t they be willing to debate it?

having a consensus reality is good, actually. and enforcement of that consensus is usually necessary to maintain the health of the community. geologists want to talk about…actual geology stuff. if flat-earthers are allowed, they’ll turn every thread into a debate about flat vs. round earth, and it will drown out the actual more interesting conversations the geologists were there for.

when someone says “such-and-such is an echo chamber” you should look to see what the consensus reality of that place is, and what aspects of that consensus reality the complainer disagrees with.

recently, I’ve seen a lot of people calling Bluesky an echo chamber, for example. if you dig into it…usually they posted some transphobic bullshit and got blocked by half the site. Bluesky isn’t perfect, but one thing they’ve gotten right so far is “trans people exist, and have the right to exist, and to live their lives free of harassment” is a pretty strong part of their consensus reality. people who disagree with that are inevitably going to run back to Twitter and whine about Bluesky being an echo chamber.

the primary source of this is annoyingly hard to track down for legislation that passed Congress and was signed by the President.

it turns out that’s because it was part of H.R.815 - “Making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes.”

if you want to read the actual text of the law, this PDF starting on page 61.

the gist is that it’s illegal to:

Providing services to distribute, maintain, or update such foreign adversary controlled application (including any source code of such application) by means of a marketplace (including an online mobile application store) through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access, maintain, or update such application.

everyone calls this a “ban on TikTok” and it kinda annoys the shit out of me, because as far as I can tell, the website tiktok.com is probably still going to be available in the US.

what this law actually does is require Google and Apple to remove TikTok from their app stores, for US-based users. and makes them subject to a fine of $5000 per user if they don’t comply.

I’m generally in favor of more regulation of tech companies…but this is a really fucking stupid way to do it.

Diane Morgan playing the character of Philomena Cunk. some of the best deadpan British humor I’ve ever seen.

you read a post about how awesome C is, asking why more people don’t use it and instead gravitate towards replacements.

you ctrl-F for “security” - no mention

“buffer overflow” - nope

“memory safety” - nothing

“undefined behavior” - nada

this is sort of a reverse Chesterton’s Fence situation. the fence is getting replaced, and you’re talking about how great the old fence was, without understanding any of the actual problems it had.

you wrote some C and found it simple? OK, great, congratulations.

go work on a C codebase that spans 100 or more engineers all contributing to it.

go write some C code that listens on a TCP socket and has to deserialize potentially-malicious data received from the public internet.

go write some C code that will be used on an aircraft and has to comply with DO-178C.

and so on. after you’ve done that, come back here and tell us if you still think it’s “simple and effective” and “applicable everywhere”.

there is a reason C has stood the test of time over many decades. but there is also a reason it is being replaced with more modern languages.

hello Cleveland Beehaw! happy to be joining this pleasant little corner of the internet.

good news: I’m in the process of buying a house, after renting my whole life up to now. got lucky that the first home I toured in-person (after viewing probably 100+ homes on Zillow) I liked enough to put in an offer, and had the offer accepted. now I’m just going through inspection and mortgage approval crap.

bad news: I broke my big toe. not broken broken, apparently just a tiny chunk of bone flaked off where the ligament is attached. I put off going to the doctor about it, because I woke up with my toe swollen and painful, Dr. Google suggested that it was probably gout, and I didn’t want to bother with a doctor visit if it was just going to be a lecture about eating healthier. so I hobbled around on a broken toe for almost 2 weeks before going in for X-rays and getting told it was broken. now I’m crossing my fingers that it’ll heal up on its own in the Fancy Medical Shoe they gave me, and I won’t have to have surgery on it. and it’s a good reminder that sometimes I need to push past my ADHD and medical anxiety and go to the doctor anyway.