Why would anyone invest in this? I thought C++ was basically in maintenance mode given that greenfield software tends to be written in Rust...
Rust fits in a similar niche, but it has a much smaller following. Several of it's main contributors just happen to be HN regulars, so it gets more attention than it otherwise would.
C++ is not memory safe - which is one reason why e.g. Java and C# are even more "extremely widely used" than C++. Rust is memory safe, and has C++ -like performance (and arguably better than C++, with e.g. its restriction of pointer aliasing and its high-level support for things like simple parallel programming).
I was genuinely under the impression that C/C++ was being progressively phased out in favor of Rust, but looks like this is hardly the case. I guess I should probably peek outside the HN filter bubble more often...
These specification changes are usually implemented by compilers _before_ the final release date. Some features take longer, but you're usually only look at 6-12 months before being able to use 100% of cutting edge.
If anything... C++ is ramping up.
However I will keep writing C++ to go along my Java, .NET, nodejs production code, for the time being.
Rust is still lacking in IDE support, mixed language debugging, OS SDKs I generally use, integration with binary libraries, not everyone on the teams is willing to add yet another language to the mix, NVIDIA GPUs are designed for C++, and newer features make it easier to write safer code, in spite of its C underpinnings.
Yes it looks phylosophically nice, but out of the language purist&geek, managers will not care if you are allowed or not to shoot you in the foot, they'll only care if you can deliver or not in due time.
You are terribly mistaken.
> given that greenfield software tends to be written in Rust...
You are terribly mistaken again.
True, but I sure hope that changes sooner than later. The top comment here echoes my sentiment about what C++ has become, while another one illustrates how cleanly the example can be done in Python and Rust. The problem as I see it is that long time C++ developers have learned all this arcane BS right along with its development. Anyone new to a language will vomit when they try C++ compared to Python or Rust. The C++ language developers are probably the least able to see what the problem is in this regard.
On a slight tangent, IMHO this approach to language development is at the heart of the issue that lead Guido to step down as Python lead. One of the proposals that got accepted crossed the line between readable code and "this is a compact way to do this but isn't intuitive on its face".
Not to mention the long history of C++. Rust has a very long way to go to catch up.
Nobody uses Rust in production. Why such thoughts in general?
(Still way less than C++, of course. But we’re making big strides!)