Should be said in defence of C++, whether its own OO model is good enough for you or not, but object scoping and destructors alone had brought a significant par

Should be said in defence of C++, whether its own OO model is good enough for you or not, but object scoping and destructors alone had brought a significant paradigm shift in programming in the 1990s. Although these concepts never really made it to other mainstream languages in such a direct form, but they certainly inspired all kinds of memory management models (ARC, GC). The result is that C++ style destructors and scope management exist implicitly in pretty much every language today. As for the OO itself, I think the problem is that any poorly written non-OO code typically goes unnoticed or just labelled "bad code", whereas poorly written OO code is labelled as such: poorly written OO code. They both are equally bad. We need to accept that if something is wrapped into a class or even some hierarchy, it is by itself not a guarantee at all that it can be useful or functional.