[jfkebwjsbx]

That is the point of backwards compatibility. It is a feature, not a bug.

Whether that feature is a good idea or not and to what degree, is the question.

[downerending]

I'm not saying it's a bug. I'm saying that backwards compatibility means that you still have to deal with all of the historic flaws of the language today.

The article is indeed still relevant.

[UncleMeat]

But that’s true for literally everything. If you have a cpp code base and are building new stuff in rust to interop then you still have legacy cpp code even though rust has fewer problems.

[KptMarchewa]

Not really. Legacy stuff can be contained. For example, you could specify language version level in file and it would disable removed/deprecated stuff.

[UncleMeat]

Linters can prevent you from using outdated C++ constructs with ease.

[Quekid5]

... but it's worth considering that this is a 'question' from 2010. Just saying...