This is a website, which means it sometimes goes offline

Lobsters is a community-driven platform for sharing and discussing links to articles, tutorials, and projects related to technology and programming. Readers can learn about a wide range of topics, from software development and system administration to cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. With user submissions, comments, and voting, Lobsters provides a platform for collaborative learning and knowledge sharing among technology enthusiasts.

Lobsters

The C++ community is divided on the language's future, particularly over backward compatibility and modernizing the language. While the Evolution Working Group aims to maintain ABI compatibility and avoid disruptive changes, other camps, including key tech companies like Google and Microsoft, are moving towards modern practices and adopting languages like Rust. The divide is notably between older industries with legacy systems and modern tech firms with sophisticated automated tooling. The C++ committee appears committed to maintaining backward compatibility, but this has created tensions within the community.

The two factions of C++

I don’t want to use Rust.
I want to use C/C++ style language but with proper builder/linker system, without header files and XXI century approach to libraries.
ZIG is great contender, I really hope they will implement some QOL and zero-cost abstractions from C++.
I may also ask for overloading operators for completeness when changing simple types to objects but I may ask for too much.
Problem with C++ is that it made some mistakes over the years (eg. constructors…), but it’s the only language that lets you do pretty much anything in anyway you want.
It’s really powerful tool and gives you freedom. It’s like sport car that lets you break the law sometimes, Rust is like electric self-driving car, their performance may be similar, safety is obvious, but it just feels different.

It is a really good article.
In my current position I work on a legacy project, and I saw myself die in the past years several times. I am the senior programmer, who is begging to allow him to set up automatic build system, linter, …

Enjoyed the content of the article, went out to bookmark your blog and the low-tech magazine for when I want to read something cool.

Great Article. Personally I think anyone who wants to change C++ in memory-safe language is delusional. C++ is low-level language and that is it’s identity. You want memory safety use Java, C#, Rust/ Personally I hate trend of making things similar to each other and I support the stand of not braking backward compatibility.
I 100% agree with, Herb Sutter with extent that I do not think regulatory can solve this either any pressure to break backward compatibility is call for disaster

I think as the C++community is so large it should maintain backward compatibility so the older users can still find it easy to understand code.