> By “reinvent everything,” I believe you mean to say that you have to make your own linked-lists to have adjustable strings, and you have to create structs with function pointers to have objects…
Spot on.
> C chose to be simple in the language itself and not in the code.
But it market itself being simple so people even newcomers think that C is simple in every regard. Only few people rarely acknowledge this fact.
> The single greatest praise that I will give to C is that the entirety of the language can be held in the mind of the programmer using it, with zero need for reference. This is impossible in most other languages.
In other languages, which parts you are unable to held in your mind?
The only instance where I need references in C++ is STD library features. But if we measure, it take less time than if we were to reinvent it on C.
Spot on.
> C chose to be simple in the language itself and not in the code.
But it market itself being simple so people even newcomers think that C is simple in every regard. Only few people rarely acknowledge this fact.
> The single greatest praise that I will give to C is that the entirety of the language can be held in the mind of the programmer using it, with zero need for reference. This is impossible in most other languages.
In other languages, which parts you are unable to held in your mind?
The only instance where I need references in C++ is STD library features. But if we measure, it take less time than if we were to reinvent it on C.