C++

“Rust's much weaker compile-time metaprogramming features make some optimizations impractical in the language that are easy in C++.”

“Today with all the available language features and library additions you never have to leave the language at all”

“then C++ loses by a mile - there's too many ways that the different features from #1 above can interact with each other”

“C++ is the best language to write multi-architecture SIMD without relying on compiler magics like autovectorization”

“Why not using C++, for example? It's available almost everywhere, introducing its usage in an existing C codebase is pretty simple.”

“C++ is the tool that Google already had, so sensible engineering is at least partially investing in incrementally improvement”

“C++'s problem is that by having so many features to please everyone, the interactions between some of the features are less than obvious”

“It does sound like a thing where if you'd written this in C++, then you could have done it much easier (which is my experience)”

“This was a huge success, creating a large resurgence in adoption and setting new expectations for what a systems language should be capable of.”

“I've yet to work with another language - and I've programmed in a shit-ton of languages - that gets out of the way as well as C++ when I want to systems-program”

“It allows as many low-level operations as one wishes, but don't forces you to manage memory manually where it isn't necessary.”

“C++ spent years trying to make out that this constitutes useful guidance before gradually accepting that people aren't in fact going to stop making mistakes”

“Practically amount of C++ code being in active development (I wat to stress this particular point) dwarfs that of Rust”

“The significant downside of C++ metaprogramming is that sometimes many features interact weakly and feel very much tacked on top of each other”

“I reach for C++, because the language runtimes, compiler tooling, and GPGPU frameworks I care about are partially written in C++”

“Even just not having to remember to call cleanup code thanks to dtors would alone be enough to sell me on it.”

“C++ occupied a niche in the right place and at the right time, and it grew from there. Many mistakes have been made”

“If you care about performance, you would not port a software architecture optimized around the limitations of Java to a systems language.”

“C++ doesn't have that (I don't know if they've considered adding it), so they can't do anything about language footguns without compatibility breaks.”

“quite a lot of undefended behavior and things that will shoot yourself in the foot have been changed over the last 10 years”

“C++ comes with baggage and requires up-front training. You need to dive into every language feature and STL library”

“I wouldn't want to miss the nice parts that C++ adds, such as lambda functions and the occasional template for generalization.”

“because it cant determine call resolution outside of a single source file, EVERYTHING gets vtable'd, which ruins downstream optimizations”

“It is difficult to overstate just how important these features are for high-performance and high-reliability systems software.”

“Using C++, Go, or Rust gets you around that problem without having to jump through the hoops of code path warmup.”

“C and C++ offer performance and control, but they introduce additional complexity around manual memory management”

“quality issues I saw on the C++ side came partially from the ease in which the language enables incompatible use of different features”

“It required learning, or at least memorizing, a significant amount of boilerplate before a freshman could even start to consider writing their logic.”

“the only things considered "safe" by the crowd are strict descendants of C/C++ with the array/pointer/string screw-ups that made those languages unsafe removed”

“footguns keep accumulating... it wouldn't hurt to have a mechanism to optionally drop the old cruft from the language”

“C++ has reasonable dynamic linking (there are ABI breaks, but I only remember only one really bad one with std::basic_string and C++11)”

“where every half-decade a pile of additive changes get piled on the previous version of the language, and nobody can clean up the old mess”

“I think this "multi-paradigm" approach works pretty well, but of course its complicated, and lots of people mess it up.”

“A subset of the language keeps getting better and better you just need to ignore the demon of many decades of bloated nonsense”

“The documentation and surrounding ecosystem of conference talks, content creators, and longer texts on new features is excellent.”

“the main problem is that the syntax still allows C style pointers and de referencing for compatibility with C code”

“while in C++ the equivalent code of accessing an uninitialized value without verifying it beforehand would have resulted in entirely unpredictable behavior”

“C++ has many advantages over C, but it also brings some clear disadvantages that matter more when you want to be aware of every operation.”

“C++ just has a lot of corners you can get sucked into, and the legacy mix of multiple generations of C++ coding styles / OO stuff makes for some really tangled messes out there.”

“the ecosystem in industry standards, IDE tooling, libraries, and training costs in existing industries where C++ is the standard”