[soulbadguy]

> As someone who spent over 20 years writing applications in C, anything built on C is crap and that includes C++ and Objective C.

Maybe that the problem, if you see C++ as something "built on C" then it logical that the see a lot of the same problem. C++ evolved from C to specifically address a lot of the weakness in C.

> Every language feature that makes debugging more necessary, harder to do and more time intensive sucks. Dangling pointers are the absolute worst.

language design is an exercise in compromise, and there is space for multiple compromise points on the spectrum. C++ decided (for better or for worst) to go for performance vs nice debugging experience.

> I can easily give up multiple inheritance for a more functional language that's far easier to write correct code in.

Am i the only getting tired of this kind of blanket statements ?

[_ph_]

The problem with C++ is, that for all its added complexity and powers, most C code still is correct C++ code, especially all the unsafe pointer manipulations. And there is no real performance reason. Many static typed languages compile to code as fast as C - if not faster thanks to tighter semantics. (Other than that some C compilers are better quality because of the effort went into them due to language popularity rather than any language feature)

[soulbadguy]

> most C code still is correct C++ code Syntaxicaly yes, but with a more precise semantic and clearer stated "undefined behavior". The canonical example is the work around type punning and such.

> And there is no real performance reason. Many static typed languages compile to code as fast as C - if not faster thanks to tighter semantics.

Speed is only one part of the equation. For stuff like drivers and low level embedded development, we still needs C like unsafe memory manipulation. Rust,D,C# etc all have ways to do that.

> Many static typed languages compile to code as fast as C - if not faster thanks to tighter semantics. (Other than that some C compilers are better quality because of the effort went into them due to language popularity rather than any language feature)

Let's just agree to disagree on that one