Where will Evolution lead C++17?

However, in my opinion C++ is changing too much, too quickly. I barely got the changes from 2008 down pat, and I look up and not only have I missed the 2011 changes, but also the 2014 changes to digest. It's going too far too fast and it feels like C++ steering committee is filled with ultra-experts that don't understand that the young kids aren't picking up C++ because Python, Java, Scala, etc are more digestible, and the older people like me who love C++ aren't able to keep up with all these changes because we aren't at the cutting edge and don't need most of this esoteric functionality they are adding.

It feels like a runaway train and if there's a few more iterations I'm going to have to give up trying to catch up because at that point it's easier to just spend my time becoming an expert in another language like Java or Scala. To mix another metaphor, it feels like the steering committee is outpacing it's supply line of users and in 2-3 more iterations, there will be such a wide swath of functionslity that it will be a complete mess because there will be too much fragmentation of the language over a relatively short time period.

Some things I personally hope will be added to C++ and/or Rust:

- coroutines

- lightweight threads

- garbage collection (for high-level stuff)

- a natural form of metaprogramming (not the convoluted approach taken by the boost libraries), i.e., active libraries that generate code based on given parameters

- pure, lazy functional programming (language subset), e.g. for concurrent stuff

- pattern matching

Am I the only one who thinks this is terrible from a semantic point of view?

About a decade ago, I suggested to the C++ committee that their avoidance of dealing with the memory safety issues in C++ constituted material support of terrorism. They were sufficiently worried to delete that posting from their USENET feed. So, a decade later, C++ has as many buffer overflows as ever.