>> Nothing is added to C++ without demonstrating usefulness. There is no "language bloat" "Bloat" doesn't require that the features are literally useless, mere

>> Nothing is added to C++ without demonstrating usefulness. There is no "language bloat" "Bloat" doesn't require that the features are literally useless, merely that their usefulness doesn't justify their added complexity. And for many people, a huge portion of C++ falls into this category. Just look at the 18 different methods of initialization for an example of this. Or look at ranges, which seem to simultaneously be far more verbose than the alternatives in every other language, while having measurable negative impacts on compile times (that have spread throughout the stdlib, so even if you don't use them you have to pay for them). Ranges are certainly "useful" but the cost/benefit ratio is questionable.