I think I can understand what you are aiming at it seems like a stretch. I guess one can make a case that modern C++ is Stroustrup´s idea, and one might even s

I think I can understand what you are aiming at it seems like a stretch. I guess one can make a case that modern C++ is Stroustrup´s idea, and one might even say "C with classes" (implemented by Stroustrup in the 80ies) is Stroustrup taking Simula's ideas and putting them on top of C so it wouldn't be really his doing. One might also add that he was still really you and frankly lacked experience. Following this, one might see the later additions to C++ in a nicer light, and frankly it was a challenging environment to improve upon pre-template C++. The problem I have with this view is that I think he is responsible for strange choices about pre-template C++, syntax wise, etc. The fact that `X a();` is a syntax conflict between a function header for a function `X a(void)` or `A a = A();` is puzzling to me, and the list can go on and on, it almost feels like he was unable to extrapolate problems programmers might have when applying it. Now, I am not sure how deep his contributions to modern C++ actually his or joint work, or even contributions by the large group of smart people that drive the standardization of C++. Maybe for C++, Rust, D and Haskell one might open up a "Team-Category" in the best language designer competition and C++ would indeed get a very favorable mention for starting out from a bad state and trying their best at lifting the language to a better place.