p4334

The P2900 contracts and extensions aim to change the nature of C++ and are an existential threat to C++, adding complexity and bloat (~56 pages in the draft standard for an incomplete version), potential overheads, and novel opportunities for errors without addressing the current community and regulatory body demands for guarantees (e.g., https://docbox.etsi.org/CYBER/CYBER/Open/ETSI_TS_104_198_DRAFT.zip presents C++ as providing no memory safety guarantees).

(emphasis mine)

Honestly I think this is by far the largest mistake that has led to the current C++ situation: listening to things like the corporate Rust party line and the Rust community (who also have the unveiled interest of replacing GPL-like code and licenses with corporate-friendly ones that allows wealth to steal projects from skill, see eg.: Ubuntu), instead of examining what's on the field, what's on the mind, and accepting that the way C++ functions is intrinsically different than a language that only provides you the tools to let you do what the makers want to let you do. Because the truth is, C++ does provide memory safety guarantees, it just puts them at a lower level of mandate than the mandate that you can make the code do (mostly) what you want rather than only what the Party line allows.

Not to mention, in this day and age anyone who surrenders to Trumpism and its associated modern Mc-Carthyism-like demands is ethically too compromised to be trustable in a field.