Look, we need more than just promises. C++ is charting a future to the past in the most torturously slow process possible, primarily because of absolutely intrasigent performance obsession that won't even admit the possibility of a 1% performance overhead for bounds checks. The C++ steering committee are the real extremists that are holding back the entire software industry because of a sacred cow and a free pass to externalize that cost onto the rest of us in terms of significantly less secure software.

▲

bagxrvxpepzn 7 months ago | parent [-]

> The C++ steering committee are the real extremists that are holding back the entire software industry because of a sacred cow and a free pass to externalize that cost onto the rest of us in terms of significantly less secure software.

The C++ leadership serves the C++ community, not the entire software industry. You and everyone who disagrees with them are free to use and write software based on other languages, e.g. Java and Rust.

	▲	pjmlp 7 months ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Many in the C++ community wouldn't acknowledge that. Which is why disabling RTTI, disabling exceptions, creating their own standard library replacement, static analysers forbinding specific language constructs, is such a big deal in some C++ circles.
	▲	humanrebar 7 months ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You can even add nonstandard features to existing compilers! The neat thing is that once the standard committee learns about this use case, it could get de facto support as existing use!