yes! and a core part of getting this right is the maturity of other features, like generics/templates, duck typing instead of or in addition to inheritance, po

yes! and a core part of getting this right is the maturity of other features, like generics/templates, duck typing instead of or in addition to inheritance, portable and well defined data memory layout, ease of reuse of existing mature C++ libraries (think numerical Fortran). I consider a language defined module system, straightforward parsing and higher level concurrency (like channels) almost icing on the cake... nobody is served with a forced rush from one idiosyncratic complexity to another. and imnsho the core issue with C++ is _not_ "safety" but complexity, of the language as such. it's just way to easy to write leaky or out of bounds writing code, in C and still in C++. and in that vein I really love carbon and Herb Sutter's Work and get me right, also rust and even good old Ada got a lot right. but please, can we discuss the better, next gen systems language as if it were not religions? but technology choices with ups and downs?