> Yeah you can now write "uint8_t" instead of "char", but the point is that the ecosystem is a landmine and all the maimed people are shamed with "you should ha

> Yeah you can now write "uint8_t" instead of "char", but the point is that the ecosystem is a landmine and all the maimed people are shamed with "you should have read the 400 page map" You're criticizing syntax from 30 years ago. Yes, the backwards compatibility (to me) is a BONUS. I would not want to junk working code that I paid for, just so I can use uint8_t. You have the option to begin a slow migration of old code into more modern code - without paying the massive cost of re-writing from scratch. I guess I am not able to connect with your criticism since it is far removed from my original point - What are examples of normal C++ syntax where the language screws you over with UB? Its a honest question - I'm not longer a C++ dev but I am curious to know what people are talking about.