Why C sucks

Shitty,slow and bug-prone string functions. NULL termination and strlen are shining examples of defective design.

No memory management, plenty of things going down the drain if
you don't watch them all. Malloc and free are slow and inefficient, and they ruin performance if used in fast loops.

Variadic functions: all C has is shitty macro which doesn't implement anything useful. C cannot determine types of such variadiac arguments at runtime. Everything is static.

Typeof(non-standard)/sizeof/pointer casts in many programs show how defective the implementation of only object C manages(the pointer) natively. Pointers(and arrays which are also pointers) are the glue of C, yet they lack anything useful(like size or datatype,sizeof alternatives like _msize/malloc_usable_size and typeof are ugly non-standard hacks)  and people use void pointers for felxibility.

>>1
I think you mean Why C sucks for my purposes.

C is the right tool for certain types of jobs. Refusing this indisputable fact is unscientific and ultimately destructive.

And yes, C/Sepples have their share of problems, not the least of which seems to be backward compatibility with.. everything since 1970.

If the languages were more modernized - which the standards attempt to achieve; though fall short when you consider that they don't do anything to drop old shit that shoudln't be supported and include new shit that would make lives easier, such as a DECENT LINKING SCHEME - you would probably find them to be quite enjoyable to use.

Though the syntax would need to be fixed up a bit first. Still, the biggest problems with C/Sepples are fixable. The stuff you mention isn't worth bothering over in comparison.