Why use C when LLMs also write stellar rust? You're not giving up any performance and you gain a modern toolchain and a safer language.
And as a next step you could have the LLM write the code such that you can use it in multiple projects. Making the token spend even more worthwile. And then maybe you can package it for other people to use as well, since the LLM wrote such stellar code that it would be idiotic for anyone to use anything else.
Whilst I have personally never had an issue with LLMs writing unsafe rust my comment was meant to be facetious. I dont't mean to disregard the fact that LLMs are easily powerful enough to reduce the need for large frameworks and libraries.
I do question how sensible it is to write everything from scratch for every project instead of relying on existing libraries with greater support.
With LLMs you can let your computer write the code and you no longer have to look at the code to get a working application.
Since you no longer have to look at the code, you no longer have to review the code either.
Since you do not have to review the code anymore, you don't have to look out for memory safety or security problems.
If you don't have to look at memory safety or security problems anymore then it's obvious that there is no difference between Rust and C.
I mean, what does Rust even give you? A type checking and borrow checking compiler that tells the LLM what it did wrong? Pah, I don't have to read compiler errors anymore so obviously that means the LLM doesn't have to do that either.
And as a next step you could have the LLM write the code such that you can use it in multiple projects. Making the token spend even more worthwile. And then maybe you can package it for other people to use as well, since the LLM wrote such stellar code that it would be idiotic for anyone to use anything else.