[pandaman]

IMO, 2ms is too much for strong macro support. Even if GC had 0 run-time cost I'd still rather use C++ since 99.9% of my code is creating memory structures of particular layout (I write graphics). To write the same code in a GC language I'd have to map memory to a file and then use the strong macro system to emulate native struct type from C++ :)

[nonsince]

This is Nim vs C#, not Nim vs C++. If you're writing hot loops and graphics code a GC is utterly anathema to your goals. I think given 5/10 years Rust will be the language of choice here, but the ecosystem is nowhere near good enough yet.

[pandaman]

As of now I don't see any problems with C++. I doubt Rust is going to offer something so much better that people will abandon the tools they already have for these benefits. Though, who knows? I never touched Rust.

[pjmlp]

It just needs a OS company to pick it up and push it down dev throats, like it happened before with C and C++.

If you want the goodies on Windows you need C++, if you want the goodies on iOS and OS X you needed Objective-C and now Swift as well, the goodies on Android require Java, the goodies on consoles moved from C to C++.

Same here, if tomorrow one of those companies decides their SDK should be Language X, anyone that wants a piece of the pie will learn Language X.

[TuringTest]

This could come from a IoT company that does things well. A company providing unsupervised devices would benefit from a OS with a strong approach to avoiding security bugs.