>>5180
>Why does the "greatest language in history" have pointers _and_ references?
You can't reassign a reference.
>C array, std::array, _and_ std::vector?
C array for C compatibility. std::array is stored on the stack.
>No algebraic data types?
There are. It depends which ones you want. You have std::variant in c++17 for sum types, but pattern matching admittedly still sucks, depending on operator overloading. If you want something better in this field, Rust or D are better choices.
>No GC?
Bit every language needs GC. We still have a need for non-GC languages and C++ is a part of that set for a reason.
>A compilation model from the 1970's which to this day limits the way you structure your code, and required header guards?
This does suck. It's that way because of history. Modules will make it better, whenever the fuck they finally land.
>A context-sensitive, undecidable grammar which makes it impossible to write a compiler that is not slow as molasses?
History. C++ parsing sucks because of decades of old shit that isn't needed anymore and a template language that's a convoluted mess.
>Incomprehensible template errors when you miss something as trivial as a semicolon?
Clang does better than g++ here.
>No standard networking library?
On the way eventually.
>The very concept of rvalue references, perfect forwarding, and RVO which no other language has to worry about?
Historical shit.
>Two separate attempts at implementing smart pointers which arPost too long. Click here to view the full text.