Regarding love of complexity and C++, they’re sitting on the C++ committee. Complexity is their bread and butter. :)
I also kinda doubt “Trillion dollar ultra low latency / high throughput high frequency trading/AAA+ games running on 4 x 4k monitors at 200+ fps” people are such enthusiasts of the bleeding-edge of C++. The standard library and the style of programming popular in the committee isn’t very concerned with high performance it seems.
Wow, I didn't know that, it explains a lot. There was a post on HN a while ago titled '“Modern” C++ Lamentations' (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29898955). My eyes bleed when I see that "N Pythagorean triples" program in "C++". That's as close to classic C++ as Chinese is to Latin. And it's barely 10+ years since 2011. At this rate I don't even dare think what the "Modernest C++" of 2034 will look like, given the incentives the committee guys run on. If programming was done with pen and paper, I'd bet on making us stick a pen in our ass and write with that. Either way I'm expecting some equivalent proctology intervention needed to comply with the standard 10 years from now.
I was recently appointed co-chair for the std::ranges group and I'm trying to bring some of the improvements to C++.
To me the think-cell guys sound like they are gung-ho on clout-chasing, to the point that this side of theirs even eclipses their own products and services.
It sounds they got the whole point of software engineering entirely backwards: their goal is to pile complex tech showcases in their product line and presentations as a proxy to being competent in their field,and instead they unwittingly put together unmaintainable and convoluted code that requires a high cognitive load just to troubleshoot the simplest issues.