Fair enough. I apologize for the accusation -- it's just that you never know. For the record, I also like C++. Especially in its modern incarnation C++11. It's

Fair enough. I apologize for the accusation -- it's just that you never know. For the record, I also like C++. Especially in its modern incarnation C++11. It's a vast improvement over plain C (if you care about generic programming, as I do). I just think we need an even better language to take its place -- hopefully Rust can deliver, in time. Re: Injection attacks: Most of the "holes" in e.g. VM emulation code also come from C/C++ legacy -- at least that's been my (admittedly anecdotal) experience. > Honestly, the undefined behaviour bits in C/C++ isn't something that I've seen matter in practice. This isn't exactly recent, but just for example: http://lwn.net/Articles/342330/ http://lwn.net/Articles/342330/ This happens all of the time, especially as optimizers get even better at exploiting the fact that undefined behavior "cannot happen" (per the semantics of the language.) Ultimately: Yeah, definitely agreed on striving for better and safer languages as long as they deliver what we need even if those are different languages and different needs -- as long as we each get better and safer and faster* code in the end! :)