> C++ just isn't a very expressive language

Compared to what? Modern C++ is by far the most expressive systems language. That is its primary selling point. It isn’t pretty but it is uniquely powerful. One of the reasons C++ isn’t disappearing any time soon is that it elegantly and efficiently handles some software design problems that Rust struggles with. Rust and C++ are optimized for different types of software.

As is implied, the type of software someone is writing has a large impact on whether or not they need the expressiveness of C++.

Can you elaborate on how Rust and C++ differ in the kinds of software they’re optimized for? And what makes C++ more elegant for purpose?

> Modern C++ is by far the most expressive systems language.

If you want to iterate over a range of integers, you need to manually explain to the computer how to do it. In 2023. Also, you need to Write Everything Twice because of the ancient header system.

No you don't. That is what ranges and modules are for.

Ranges: kind of, there is the very awkwardly named std::ranges::iota_view, but it doesn't support random access and who knows if the compiler can optimize iteration over it into a simple loop.

Modules are not supported by most compilers (in g++ you have to enable them as an experimental feature with -fmodules-ts, and if you want to import the standard library as modules, you need to pre-compile them into your project directory with some arcane commands).

Ranges: they are there, naming is a matter of taste.

Modules: GCC and clang will eventually get there, I am already enjoying them on VC++

    #define RANGE(type, name, last) type name = 0, last__ = (last); name != last__; name++

    for (RANGE(i32, i, foo->count))
        ...

That solves the problem even in C. But why care much, typing a few plain loops isn't among the hard problems to solve.

Compared to Rust.

Once you you've worked enough with proper enums and matches, that's the first thing you'll be lacking in C++ (and no, std::variant is a horrible mess without proper syntax support and doesn't even get close).

If anything, C++ is too expressive...

There is a difference between what you can do at all, and what you can do without hard thinking. C++ makes a lot of things possible, but fewer things easily possible. I program mostly in C++ and I don't hate it, FWIW...

Agreed, but I would probably still be programming in C++ if the tooling weren’t so bad, irrespective of the expressiveness. That said, I’m glad Rust is expressive, but more glad that it picked a coherent set of language features—it feels much less cobbled together than C++ if only for the benefit of hindsight.

Not very expressive? Are we talking about ARM C++ here?

C++ has lots of problems, lack of expressiveness isn't one of them.

> C++ just isn't a very expressive language and has a high impedance with cognition.

I feel that you are the very first person ever making such a statement. Can you provide what's your single best example showing C++'s inexpressiveness and "high impedance with cognition"?

Sum types. And/or proper error handling (also related to sum types).