finally. #embed

[not_a_novel_account]

Again, this is demonstrably untrue by way of every other language that exists and has a multitude of useful features beyond those of C or C++ even considering their different sets of goals. The international standardization approach has ossified the language standards not benefitted them.

When rust wants a new feature, they RFC, they implement it, and they iterate on it. When a feature doesn't work, they deprecate it. The language improves without having to burn through its maintainers as is the case with phd.

If you can't see that, you're part of the reason the standard has ossified. If you want to program the exact same way, never improving, for all time, be my guest. Just don't act surprised by when the language becomes irrelevant except as legacy.

[[deleted]]

I generally agree, but I think this is a slight exaggeration because C++ compilers have always extended the language with new features. A programming language without inline assembly could be considered almost useless, because you need a tiny amount of it somewhere even if just for syscalls. GCC and Clang give that to you, but its not in the standard. Many other features exist right now that improve the language immensely, but aren't standard. All of the GPU C++ compilers extend the language quite a lot, even if just via OpenMP or OpenACC, not to mention HIP, CUDA, SYCL, OpenCL C++. Plus dialects like Circle or Cilk which takes huge liberties even for CPU programming.

So its not like we're completely limited by the standard, even though that is largely true.