[virgilp]

It is kindof an interesting point you bring up here. However, it's also true that languages (and software in general) are what people make of it, not necessarily what their creators intended. I do believe that the stuff that happens to do what you want when shoved into a C++ compiler _is_, for all intents and purposes, C++. And I kinda' think/feel that that is also what the committee is saying - "we want C++ to keep doing that, rather than evolve into a safer thing that is no longer C++"

[AlotOfReading]

I get the argument, but the community argument doesn't actually change anything. No compiler will guarantee any particular behavior in the presence of memory safety issues. Very few programs happily tolerate random memory corruption or race conditions, etc.

[andrewprock]

Run valgrind on any large successful code base and you will find tons of memory corruption. It just happens to occur in places where it does not matter.