Just where has this language gone wrong?

[Nick Sabalausky]

On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 17:19:09 -0400
Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe at semitwist.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:51:19 +0200
> "Stuart" <stugol at gmx.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 15:56:37 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> > > Am 23.07.2012 14:49, schrieb Stuart:
> > >> On Saturday, 21 July 2012 at 22:16:52 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> C++ is living in the 70's.
> > >>
> > >> Precisely what I have been thinking. It's a loose wrapper 
> > >> around
> > >> assembly, nothing more. Certainly not the "high-level language"
> > >> it's touted as.
> > >
> > > Only due to the lack of modules.
> > >
> > > Everything else is a pretty modern language I would say.
> > 
> > Hardly. No RTTI. No GC. No properties. No events. No closures. No 
> > extension methods. No interfaces. No writable references.
> > 
> 
> Null-terminated strings. Preprocessor. No reflection. Effectively
> undefined sizes for primitive types. Undefined behavior galore.
> Neither default initialization nor enforced initialization before
> variable usage. No reference types (Foo& isn't what I mean).
> Horrendous type syntax for mixed arrays/ptrs or functions ptrs, etc.
> No forward references (or at least very limited). And a grammar that
> forces compilation to be very, very slow.
> 

Speaking of, I understand he had C++ in mind when he wrote this song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOj3wDlr_BM