A C++ replacement must have really strong and seamless C++ interop to be considered by anyone currently using C++. You can't have a C++ replacement by ignoring existing C++ users and libraries, no matter how good the the language is.
Swift from Apple and Carbon from Google are stronger contenders at this point.
No language from Apple / Google / Microsoft / whatever can ever be a serious replacement for C++. When the development of the language is dominated by a single entity, the risk that the interests of that entity override those of other users is simply too high.
Vendor-specific languages are fine, if you are developing something for that vendor's ecosystem. But if you don't want to lock your code to a specific ecosystem, an independent language such as C++ or Rust is a better choice.
C++ is only independent on the surface, as all the big players seat at WG21, and it goes where their votes say it goes, plus what actually gets implemented into compilers (none of them is 100% ISO compliant, each one has minor compliance issues).
Same applies to C, stuff like C23 is decided by who gets to join WG14.
In both cases, someone has to buy the final standard from ISO.
A C++ replacement must have really strong and seamless C++ interop to be considered by anyone currently using C++. You can't have a C++ replacement by ignoring existing C++ users and libraries, no matter how good the the language is.
Swift from Apple and Carbon from Google are stronger contenders at this point.
No language from Apple / Google / Microsoft / whatever can ever be a serious replacement for C++. When the development of the language is dominated by a single entity, the risk that the interests of that entity override those of other users is simply too high.
Vendor-specific languages are fine, if you are developing something for that vendor's ecosystem. But if you don't want to lock your code to a specific ecosystem, an independent language such as C++ or Rust is a better choice.
C++ is only independent on the surface, as all the big players seat at WG21, and it goes where their votes say it goes, plus what actually gets implemented into compilers (none of them is 100% ISO compliant, each one has minor compliance issues).
Same applies to C, stuff like C23 is decided by who gets to join WG14.
In both cases, someone has to buy the final standard from ISO.
I don't disagree.
Pragmatic considerations tend to win over ideological ones though.
Consider Java's success.
2 replies →