Half-broken, bolted-on garbage that is found in a much nicer form in high level languages which have those things in their core vision from the beginning, or the kind of extensibility which can cleanly support new ideas.

> And I'm not even getting into C++17.

I'm with you there, in a way.

I don't find auto, lambda, and variadic templates, move semantics and smart pointers to be bolted on. You can write Fortran in any language.

You think rvalue references are a natural and elegant construct? That if C++ were designed with move semantics in mind, this is the road they would have travelled down?

That's the biggest reason that I like Rust more than C++, even more than lifetime/safety. I've been working on a C++14 application, and "std::move" shows up a lot more than implicit copies, which not only makes the code more verbose, but analyzing performance more difficult. (I so wish I could be using Rust, but, unfortunately, the only FOSS DNP3 implementation is in C++.)

Please show me the "nice" and "well thought" and "elegant" and "modern" language with the sheer amount of resources, documentation and momentum that C++ has? It's not going to go away for the foreseeable future, even if slightly better options arise (notice the slightly, no language has substantially improved on C++ in a meaningful enough way to make the benefits of migrating greater than the headaches).