Article by Ayman Alheraki on January 11 2026 10:35 AM
C++ is a powerful programming language that has proven its value over decades in various domains, from embedded systems to large-scale applications, thanks to its high performance and precise control over resources. However, the language faces longstanding issues, such as the lack of an integrated package manager and the complexity of memory management compared to modern languages like Rust. Despite these challenges, C++ remains the top choice for developers who require deep system-level control.
One of the main reasons for not introducing significant improvements, such as a built-in package manager or Rust-like memory management, is C++’s commitment to backward compatibility. This commitment makes it challenging to introduce drastic changes that could break existing projects.
The C++ ecosystem spans decades, and compilers like GCC and Clang are designed to support code written in the 1990s and beyond.
C++ prioritizes flexibility, allowing developers to choose between manual memory management or tools like std::unique_ptr and std::shared_ptr.
Simplifying the language could conflict with its philosophy of being a tool for professionals who prefer complete control over enforced "smart" features.
The C++ community heavily relies on external libraries like Boost to provide advanced features. For example, package managers like Conan and vcpkg are popular tools that address library management, reducing the demand for an integrated package manager.
The current focus of the C++ community is on improving the Standard Template Library (STL) rather than adding built-in tools like package managers.
Adding features like a Garbage Collector or robust memory management could reduce performance, which is unacceptable in domains like gaming, embedded systems, and high-performance software.
For instance, Rust uses the concepts of Ownership and Borrowing to ensure memory safety, but implementing such a system in C++ would require fundamental changes, potentially altering its identity.
A built-in package manager would help developers manage libraries more easily. Tools like vcpkg could be officially endorsed by ISO C++ and standardized.
Enhancing CMake support to simplify project management for both large and small applications is another viable solution.
Promote the use of standard tools like std::unique_ptr and std::shared_ptr while introducing additional libraries for safe memory management without enforcing a Garbage Collector.
Introduce optional features similar to Rust’s Ownership model without compromising performance.
Integrate static analysis tools into compilers to detect memory management errors during compile-time.
Provide safer programming models as optional configurations that can be enabled when needed.
Offer solutions to facilitate C++ integration with languages like Rust to leverage their advantages without replacing C++.
Enhance support for interfaces like FFI (Foreign Function Interface).
C++ is used in systems requiring precise resource control, such as aviation, automotive, and military applications. These domains rely on high performance and long-term stability, which don’t necessarily require language simplification.
Simplification could reduce the language’s flexibility, conflicting with the needs of projects relying on C++.
Innovation in C++ appears in features like Concepts and Ranges introduced in recent standards. While these features are complex, they provide developers with powerful tools to achieve their goals efficiently.
Languages inspired by C++, such as Carbon, aim to offer simpler alternatives, but widespread adoption requires significant time.
Despite the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) recommending avoiding C/C++ in favor of languages like Rust, several factors ensure C++’s continued relevance:
Legacy Infrastructure: Many systems still rely on C++ code written decades ago.
Performance and Specialization: Projects requiring high performance still depend on C++ as it provides unmatched control that Rust and other alternatives cannot offer without additional trade-offs.
Strong Community: The C++ community is vast and includes seasoned developers who continue to prefer the language over alternatives.
C++ has the potential to evolve and address its current challenges, but doing so requires balancing the language’s identity with the addition of new features without sacrificing performance or backward compatibility. Adding optional features, such as memory safety tools and a built-in package manager, might be the ideal approach. However, the success of C++ remains rooted in its core philosophy: performance, flexibility, and full control over resources.