C++ doesn't solve the problem. C++ papers over the problem with templates. You can still get raw pointers out of C++ objects, and for most APIs, you have to. The underlying language objects are still unsafe.
ok, so write C++ classes that don't let you access raw pointers. I mean I understand that C/C++ languages are less safe than, say, Java - but that is the whole point. The lesser safety gives you better performance. If you don't care about bleeding edge performance, you should probably choose Java or Python or some other language that is much more flexible and easier to use
No. That excuse has been bandied about for years, but it's wrong, as we're now seeing as Rust gets better. C's problems with arrays come from lack of expressive power in the language. C doesn't even let you talk about array size in parameters.
Many of C's painful design decisions come from trying to cram a compiler into a PDP-11 with 128KB (not MB) of memory for a process. Global analysis on a machine that small while retaining reasonable compile times was hopeless. This is no longer a limitation.
I think the thing is that the problems people are still using C to solve for are a different than the ones where people are using C++, Java, C#. Meaning if C++ was a better option then people would have switched to using C++ two decades ago. Yet C has historical deficiencies that could be fixed by smallish mostly painless extensions to the language.
