> Between safety on modern CPUs and supporting 40-years CPU I would choose the first.
I don't know what you mean with "modern", but x86 was first introduced in 1978, 1985 for 32-bit, and 2003 for 64-bit, for example.
There may be a water purifier somewhere running in a 1995 x86 box that still needs to be maintained.
> Safety is the requirement for desktop, mobile and server
There are several degrees of "safe", and I don't mean just "a hacker stole my data".
I am sure you hear about internet services crashing all the time. A failing service could be a safety issue too. And no, they are not written in C. There are entire companies living on providing redundancy and watchdog services. Often companies just go with "I don't care if the program crashes, we put another server up, just keep developing new features in whatever safe language we are using".
I don't know what you mean with "modern", but x86 was first introduced in 1978, 1985 for 32-bit, and 2003 for 64-bit, for example.
There may be a water purifier somewhere running in a 1995 x86 box that still needs to be maintained.
> Safety is the requirement for desktop, mobile and server
There are several degrees of "safe", and I don't mean just "a hacker stole my data".
I am sure you hear about internet services crashing all the time. A failing service could be a safety issue too. And no, they are not written in C. There are entire companies living on providing redundancy and watchdog services. Often companies just go with "I don't care if the program crashes, we put another server up, just keep developing new features in whatever safe language we are using".