There are a lot of projects that really could be written in a high-level language, but they were started when C was still preferable due to the immaturity of higher-level solutions. I think it is sad that people, looking at these aging and unaudited C codebases, are thinking about rewriting them in Rust, when rewriting them in e.g. Python might make better sense. Very little Free Software needs to be so close to the metal, and it was just a historical accident that we got so much written in C.
So the historical accident was UNIX/POSIX taking over the majority of OS architectures.
I agree... apart from the Python bit. :) When deving software that is very big (LOC) or very widely distributed (FLOSS packages), then I prefer "well typed" languages that do not need a VM/interpreter.
> And I don't need that last drop of performance either.
You probably write more highlevel code? Rust is --as the name implies-- most suited for close-to-the-metal code. This is often where that "last drop of performance" counts.