[pjmlp]

Most Objective-C codebases are brown field development.

Apple themselves, the only framework that they started from scratch in recent years was Metal, and even there only die hards use Objective-C instead of the Swift bindings.

Could be better, it isn't as bad as you make it to be, for a language whose design goals are to replace C, C++ and Objective-C for Apple.

[jtrueb]

Having worked on the old, the migrating, and the new, I appreciate Swift more than Objective-C mostly due to IDE support.

If they had put the effort into Objective-C++ that they put into Swift, I struggle to imagine it in a worse place than Swift is in these days.

[pjmlp]

Any language that is copy-paste compatible with C is a lost cause in regards to security.

From language features and community culture point of view.

[jtrueb]

I think that is a bit of an overstatement given the amount of legacy code and bindings generation capabilities. I do think it had to swing towards memory safe and C++ still didn’t have a plan for smart pointers much less move semantics when Swift dev started.

Who knows what present day Objective-C++ could have been if it had been the workhorse language of choice. Maybe this profiles thing Bjarne is pushing could have been in the roadmap. We will never know.

[pjmlp]

Not at all, besides Objective-C would have been dead by now, had it not been for NeXT reverse acquisition of Apple.

Additionally Objective-C++ never was seen anything beyond interop with existing C++ code, and only old timers like myself have its documentation, you will hardly find anything about it on Apple's documentation nowadays.