> branching None that I know of from the last 20 years or so. > inlining This one is tricky. Sure, GCC ignoring the inline keyword is annoying, but sometimes

> branching None that I know of from the last 20 years or so. > inlining This one is tricky. Sure, GCC ignoring the inline keyword is annoying, but sometimes figuring out if something is inline-able is undecidable, and sometimes things just aren't capable of being inlined. > blocking inlining This is something that I don't understand why we don't have. Sure, lots of times you would rather inline than not, but sometimes inlining the wrong expression can subtly change the performance / lookup / dispatch semantics in weird ways. I've no hard examples of this, but it should be easy enough for almost every language to have a --no-inline flag. > RVO C++11 and up somewhat handle this with move semantics. Having a separation of rvalues / lvalues certainly helps, but the distinction could probably be clearer, as it can get to be a gruesome and hairy topic depending on your types. > const != immutability That you can often just "cast the const away" is really the problem here. I think Rust improves on this space as there is no safe cast to remove const-ness, but if you ever find yourself or somebody else casting away const, you / they should realize that they are going against the design of the system. I'm still undecided if "mutable" keyword in C++ classes is so horrible in this context, as it certainly helps in making const-types usable with the rest of the language (which is inherently non-const).