Definitions of “better” may vary. It’s better to be objective and refer to specific features. For instance, the C programming language is standardized and ubiquitous, and in the event of a nuclear apocalypse odds are C projects will continue to be compilable. None of it’s alternatives comes close to provide that level of stability and reliability.
I’m not saying Rust is better - I prefer c/cpp myself. I’m just saying that if someone is going to move away from c to a new language, it’s overwhelmingly more likely to be Rust.
Definitions of “better” may vary. It’s better to be objective and refer to specific features. For instance, the C programming language is standardized and ubiquitous, and in the event of a nuclear apocalypse odds are C projects will continue to be compilable. None of it’s alternatives comes close to provide that level of stability and reliability.
I’m not saying Rust is better - I prefer c/cpp myself. I’m just saying that if someone is going to move away from c to a new language, it’s overwhelmingly more likely to be Rust.