I disagree. Rust and Zig bring millions of lines of code of dependencies and complexity in their toolchains. We can hope for a relatively simple Zig compiler someday, but probably not Rust. If you care about portability (now and in the future), C is a much better choice.
replyFair point on toolchain complexity and portability, C's minimalism there is genuinely hard to beat. But it's a tradeoff: you're trading toolchain simplicity for the burden of manually ensuring memory safety. Depends on whether your priority is long-term portability or correctness guarantees.
replyThanks for the suggestion! I've
heard great things about both Rust
and Zig for systems programming.
replyI started with C because most osdev resources and tutorials use C, and I wanted to understand manual memory management at the lowest level first.
Might explore rewriting parts in Rust or Zig in the future, the safety guarantees do sound appealing for kernel code!