”If the practitioners haven’t adopted what you’re offering for 50+ years, that thing can’t be good.” I don’t think what features are popular in C++ is good ind

”If the practitioners haven’t adopted what you’re offering for 50+ years, that thing can’t be good.” I don’t think what features are popular in C++ is good indication of anything. The language is good only due to the insane amounts of investment to the ecosystem, not because of the language features due to design. For an industrial language inventory of ”nice features to have” F# and C# are mostly my personal gold standard. ”Too theoretical” is IMO not the correct lens to use. I would propose as a better lens a) which patterns you often use b) how to implement them in language design itself. A case in point is the gang-of-four book. It mostly gives names to things in C++ that are language features in better languages.