On 22 November 2025 11:12:16 GMT, Phil Bouchard via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>The bottom line with C++ is we expect the language to be low-latency, the rest are details and it's impossible to please everybody.
>
>Python is even worse than Basic in terms of design given:
>
>- Arrays don't have random access which is horrible;

They are random access.

>
>- Is not even backwards and forward compatible;
>
>- Redirecting streams require ugly subroutines;
>
>- ...
>
>
>-Phil
>
>On 11/22/25 04:49, organicoman via Std-Proposals wrote:
>> Exactly... that's my point.
>> I wanted this video to be a wake-up call to all of us.
>> We need to see the world from others point of view, to understand our problems.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my Galaxy
>>
>>
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: Richard Hodges via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]>
>> Date: 11/22/25 10:41 AM (GMT+01:00)
>> To: std-proposals_at_[hidden]
>> Cc: Richard Hodges <hodges.r_at_[hidden]>
>> Subject: Re: [std-proposals] The most fair rant on C++
>>
>> FWIW I think everyone on the committee should be forced to watch it.
>>
>> While some of the complaints mentioned in the video are minor legacy issues from C, immeasurable damage has been done to the language in the name of:
>>
>> - not wanting to introduce new keywords
>> - not wanting to change the language
>> - forcing features into the standard library when they should be language features
>> - not using version numbers in namespaces
>> - insisting on compatibility when a clean break would be better
>>
>> I could go on.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 22 Nov 2025 at 00:09, organicoman via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>> I saw this video, and i felt it would be interesting to hear
>> other's opinions.
>>
>> https://youtu.be/7fGB-hjc2Gc?si=EqMPxxxvS40lL4Yv
>>
>> Regards
>> Og
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my Galaxy
>>
>> -- Std-Proposals mailing list
>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>>
>>