For me what killed C++ above all else is how incredibly 3rd-party-library hostile it has turned out to be.
The article covers a bunch of stumbling blocks that are external to the language, but there are at least as many in the language itself.
It wasn't deliberate of course, but a million little decisions and unadressed problems in the language ended up conspiring to create a miserable experience when assembling systems from libraries. This may not have been a very big problem 20 years ago - I suspect the current culture of many small libraries as building blocks didn't really exist then - but today it's a show stopper.
How about the way that the standard doesn't specify the linker's name mangling, so many linkers do it in mutually incompatible ways, meaning you can't use a library linked by one linker with a main program linked by another.
I can't believe www.dead-link.com is being squatted. Who in their right minds wants to name their product or have their product be associated with dead link?
I used to love C++ until I realized powerful languages existed that didn't require you to read several books (e.g Scott Meyers effective C++ series) in order to avoid shooting yourself in the foot.
> I program in C++ for a living. I loved doing it in my late 20′s and early 30′s, but over the past few years I’ve gotten fed up with this language and its cryptic aggravating bullshit.
I can't tell you how many times I have googled an issue only to have #10(?)on his list happen to me. Nevermind I figured it out myself...
A damn dirty trick that is.
