C++, usually under the misleading label C/C++, is under attack from the US and EU regulatory bodies, the managements of several powerful commercial organizations, and just about everybody promoting a different language for anything C++ is used for or might be used for (e.g., see references). In particular, the US government demands a plan for achieving memory safety by 2026 and several important organizations will follow that. Without the support from the committee this will imply
• Disuse of C++ for many important new projects
• Decreased funding for future development of C++ language, libraries, and tools
This is unprecedented and ignores C++ strengths. This has already started.
So urgent, some of Bjarne's "facts" are not strictly true, like "US government demands a plan for achieving memory safety by 2026". AFAIK there is no binding rule.
>> some of Bjarne's "facts" are not strictly true, like "US government demands a plan for achieving memory safety by 2026". AFAIK there is no binding rule.
While not binding, the guidance could be viewed as a "very strong recommendation":
If you sell software to government agencies and fail to implement the guidance, but your competitors do implement the guidance it might impact which software is selected for government contracts.
See also: "The Plethora of Problems With Profiles" at https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2025/p35...