I don't know, C isn't out there causing cancer and killing people left and right. It's hyperbolic to draw that comparison. Critical systems (especially post Therac-25) that are using C are already using a subset of C, static analysis tools, and comprehensive testing that raise the quality level of actual life-and-health-impacting C programs.

EDIT: Because someone will probably make a note of it: Therac-25 wasn't written in C, but the flaws in that system and others helped lead to a massive change in the way critical systems are developed and treated. I referenced it because it's one of the most notable failures in safety-critical software systems.

It’s fine to argue that the analogy is flawed (all of them are) or that it’s irrelevant, or simply wrong.

What this entire thread is about, however, is this highly charged response to what seemed like a straightforward analogy.

> Frankly getting your knickers in a knot is emotional - the people using C are doing so for pragmatic reasons, not emotion. > I do see comments like yours a lot - there's an emotional attachment and/or ego attached to the comment, so the argument against is very vociferous and, honestly, ugly[1].

At the end of the day it seems as though an emotional argument occurred in the eye of the beholder. This only adds even more credibility to the root comment.

A failed experiment with the Socratic method on my part.