Thanks for posting it as the comments have valuable feedback. I was holding off on responses until it dropped off the front page to let the discussions happen unimpeded. I can already see ways to make the case more clear. What I haven't seen is any contradictory evidence supplied with citations about (a) why C's justifications then no longer apply outside maybe embedded or (b) why it was better a design level than others. A few, good opinions, though. A few comments also have some misinformation on C the article itself addresses despite citations in article... from inventors of BCPL and C... directly contradicting their claims. That's the psychological effect I mention where cause and effect being so far separated in history that affected people not knowing bad causes (or no longer applicable ones) start inventing better, false causes to reinforce their choice of language or faith in its design process.

All in all, I've enjoyed reading the feedback on my ranty summary of that Vimeo vid I did in half an hour or so after doing a C debate. I did condense hours of watching/reading into something digestible but presentation is still shit in a number of ways. Many of points survived with others needing to be improved or replaced to make case clearer. Will do in near future. :)