> Rust has all of those other than portability.
That's crippling. Arguably the best use case for C++ is coding video games, and portability is huge there.
That's crippling. Arguably the best use case for C++ is coding video games, and portability is huge there.
Of which Rust has backends for all them, even the web via wasm.
While Rust is not as portable, it's not like it's strictly limited to well functioning x86 boxes, it'll produce binaries for anything that LLVM supports, which is quite a lot by now.
Are those backends officially supported on consoles? Do all those consoles have libraries and tools (profilers, debuggers, etc) that support Rust?
We'll see if this changes in the future, especially with some of the names doing Rust dev in these places.
C++14 and C++17 were minor upgrades by comparison, so I'd say C++11 can rightly be called modern C++, though others may disagree.
Of course when it comes to practical portability today then you're right as there are plenty more C++ compilers for different platforms than Rust compilers (then again, there are more C compilers than C++ in that regard). This may eventually change over time, tho, but it sure is something to consider today.
PS and edit: I don't mind you disagreeing with me, but would anybody care to illuminate me as to what your disagreement is about?