So like Lisp, C might end up being a solo programmer’s tool too. But not because it is a breeding ground for DSLs but because everyone is adhering to different conventions in the absence of the compiler enforcing one.
What you said is:
> I can write C that frees memory properly...that basically doesn't suffer from memory corruption...I can do that, because I'm controlling heaven and earth in my software. It makes it very hard to compose software. Because even if you and I both know how to write memory safe C, it's very hard for us to have an interface boundary where we can agree about who does what.
And I stand by my point. Single-responsibility principle will get you covered, yes, even in C.
> I actually am not asking for your opinion --
You could show some respect.
> I'm asking for a link to the implementation itself. The details here matter
B-tree btw is a silly example which particularly is not among the hard design problems out there and there are dozens of implementations laying around. Obvious examples to look for would be in transactional database systems implemented in C.
> (and indeed, that's the whole point).
... and the point not being quite clear, even after politely asking for a clarification, so perhaps next time you don't try to play the authority but try to provide an actual example to support your otherwise questionable claim. I'm sure Rust community will profit from individuals like yourself.
All this is a reflection of the so-called Lisp curse, the fundamental problem with Lisp -- its great strength is simultaneously its great weakness. It is super-simple to customize Lisp to suit your personal tastes, and so everyone does, and so you end up with a fragmented ecosystem of little sub-languages, not all of which (to put it mildly) are particularly well designed.
[1] http://blog.rongarret.info/2023/01/lisping-at-jpl-revisited....