To use the subset that makes it a better alternative than C, aka "Typescript for C", and ignore the rest.

Hopefully we would have moved on into fully bootstraped alternatives, but open source has decided to build their alternative languages on top of LLVM and GCC instead, with some minor exceptions.

Note that I am starting to have a "find it hard to keep up with the language changes" similar feeling with Java, C#, Python and TypeScript.

I have the same opinion. C++ was my first programming language I used at work. I feel that I was relatively proficient with it, but it was around 2005 I think. Since then I've mostly used other languages. Right now I feel I can use C with ease, in fact I periodically use it. But C++? I don't even dare.

I guess it's fine if one specializes on C++ programming only. But when one needs to use different languages and C++ is used sporadically, I feel like it might be substantially harder than other languages.

I've never used LLMs for C++ but I notice that it likes to use every available feature on other languages. Is Claude-generated C++ incomprehensible as a result?

Extreme accretion/scope-creep of syntax (and features) across all languages continues, C++ is probably one of the most extreme example of this.

Everyone's trying to bring in the shiniest new toys from all other languages. So-called "modern C++" is an unbearable menu of every possible flavor of procedural, functional, OOP, templates, strong/weak typing, metaprogramming, and so much more. End result is a Frankenstein mix of C, Fortran, Pascal, Python, F#, Scala, C#/Java, Visual Basic, LUA, TCL, Rust, and what not... and that's before we even talked about the STL/STD situation in C++.

The only correct way to work with C++ is to agree on the most minimal subset of features needed for consistency and productivity in your codebase, stick to those and avoid adopting 95% of the crap that's being brought in. Ignore the noise.

C++ was complex already 15 years ago (template metaprogramming, anyone?).

Can't imagine what it must be nowadays.

The best orgs have style guide that restrict features

Going from C++11 to 14 and so on... it’s hard to keep up with those changes. And I’m reluctant to use C++—not because C++ is a bad language, but basically because it’s been used so widely, the places I work have a lot of legacy C++ code, and since each version is different, it’s hard to adapt. I know it’s not a feature everyone uses, and I know you have to define your domain according to your work and limit yourself to a subset, but C++ can do too many things, and even within that there are many overlapping ways, so it’s more confusing. When features are added, you do feel pressure to know them, right? In my head I know “C++ should be limited depending on the domain!” but the problem is that using this language means you have to know it—and even in the same domain, C++ has many different ways of doing the same thing, so it’s freeing but painful for maintenance, I think.

Even the author of a well-known series of books about C++ has long since "given up" because the laundry list of footguns, caveats and adversarial interactions between different features has gotten too long.

The complexity of C++ lies only in template programming, and it doesn't add any efficiency to the final program—on the contrary, it makes the program harder for other programmers to read.

Technically, you're only learning to mentally unfold multi-level nested templates just to verify how they work, and all for the sake of making the program look small with less boilerplate?

This is complete nonsense. For me, C++ died with the 11 standard.