OSNews

While I like the additions on their own I am not sure I like C++ as a whole.

What I would have like to see is a very strong "C++ The Good Parts" recommendation with a lot of commitment. And one that goes way beyond what current guidelines say. 0x would have been a great time for that.

I am not sure that _I_ would start _new_ projects in 0x when fairly mature and much simpler solutions like Go exist for a lot of similar problem spaces.

If D features Go style interfaces, or Go feature D style template modules, I'm sold. Sadly neither is true

I too would like to see a much simplified C++ design, instead of even more features added with few things removed. But I fear that we each would like to keep/remove a very different set of features, sort of proving Stourstup's point of creating a monster-sized "multi-paradigm" language.

As an example, I like that C++, like C, is good for all OS layers, provided that you are cautious with some features. But many other persons would probably prefer something that's fine-tuned for application-level development, and totally drops the power and control needed for low-level use in favor of extra comfort.

Agree 100%. I taught myself c/c++ in the mid 90's from books written in the late 70s early 80s at the school library and old borland Turbo C compilers. When moving to gcc in the late 90's I really wanted some *good* *modern* best practices guide to using the language. I never found anything of the sort. When I got my first job, I was made fun of for my ancient syntax patterns, even by the gray beards.