I mean, you can call it a rebuttal, but this: “There are two problems related to safety. Of the billions of lines of C++, few completely follow modern guidelin

I mean, you can call it a rebuttal, but this: “There are two problems related to safety. Of the billions of lines of C++, few completely follow modern guidelines, and peoples’ notions of which aspects of safety are important differ. I and the C++ standard committee are trying to deal with that,” sounds like an admission that, following decades of improvements and modernisations to C++, safety and quality remain a practical concern in most actual C++ codebases. In many ways it’s surprising that it has taken this long to call time on it. I can understand Stroustrup’s frustration; the work they’ve been doing has been excellent, but there’s nothing stopping industry or the government switching to other options that are making better headway against problems like this.