Modern C++ Won't Save Us
I really don&#x27;t get all the hate that C++ gets. The suggested alternatives in the article are Rust and Swift. What if you need to develop a cross platform GUI, that has a backend running a CUDA or OpenCL algorithm? For the former, you can use Qt, which isn&#x27;t without it&#x27;s warts, but is pretty tried and true in my experience (see KDE, VTK, etc). For the latter, you&#x27;ll end up writing your CUDA code in C++ anyways. I guess you could go the route of writing bindings, but that is not without additional effort. Not that it won&#x27;t happen for Rust, but C++ also has tooling suited for enterprise use that are largely unmatched in other languages (Visual Studio, Qt, etc). Sandboxing, static analysis, and fuzzing tools are also mostly built for C&#x2F;C++ codebases. It&#x27;s also an ISO standard language which makes it both a language full of warts due to decision by committee, but also a candidate for a stable, long-lasting language that will outlive many of us. (Try finding an ISO Standard Language you don&#x27;t hate).<p>Either way, C++ is certainly not for every project, but the articles scattered around the web claiming it should be superseded by Rust are plentiful. These opinion pieces make no attempt to credit C++ for when it <i>does</i> make sense to use. Despite it&#x27;s quirks, it is still the most optimal way to program HPC applications or cross platform GUIs that are not Electron based. The security tools around it and the fact that it&#x27;s an ISO standard language make it a solid choice for many enterprises.