Why Settle For C++ When A++ Exists?

Microsoft Azure CTO declares C and C++ should be "deprecated" while his entire company runs on it. That's like a fish suggesting water is overrated. Next up: Windows will run on thoughts and prayers instead of kernel code. Meanwhile, Linux kernel devs, game engine programmers, and embedded systems engineers just collectively rolled their eyes so hard they saw their own brain stems.

The universal rite of passage for coding newbies: discovering a semicolon error and treating it like they've found the Higgs boson of programming problems. Veterans watching this unfold are just sitting there thinking, "Ah yes, I remember when I too believed semicolons were worthy of philosophical debate instead of letting my IDE handle it while I focus on actual problems... like why my perfectly functional code works in dev but crashes in production." Nothing screams "I just installed VS Code yesterday" quite like passionately sharing that semicolon meme your non-technical friend would find hilarious.

Starting with plain C: "Yeah, I guess memory management is my problem now." Then C++: "Wait, you're telling me I can have classes AND still shoot myself in the foot?" C# arrives: "Microsoft made something... actually decent?" And finally, whatever that monstrosity at the bottom is (probably Rust or some ML framework): "THE COMPILER KNOWS ALL MY SINS AND REFUSES TO LET ME COMPILE UNTIL I CONFESS THEM." Each language adds more symbols and more existential dread. Ten years of coding and I still can't tell if we're evolving or just adding more ways to overcomplicate "Hello World."

Ah, the classic "use-after-free" vulnerability just got real-world consequences! While normal humans talk about wanting to have their cake and eat it too (an impossible situation), our programmer dude immediately translates it into memory management speak. A use-after-free vulnerability happens when a program continues to use a pointer after it's been freed, potentially leading to crashes, data corruption, or even remote code execution. Basically, this guy's brain is so deep in debugging mode that he can't even have a normal conversation without turning it into a technical analysis. His relationship status? It's complicated... just like his codebase.

The eternal dilemma of function design perfectly illustrated on an IQ bell curve. The low-IQ crowd (0.1%) and high-IQ geniuses (0.1%) agree: "Just add a new function." Meanwhile, the average devs (34%) in the middle are sweating bullets, desperately clinging to their sacred principle of code reuse: "NO WE SHOULD ADD ANOTHER PARAMETER AND REUSE CODE!" It's the horseshoe theory of programming - both extremes of the intelligence spectrum somehow reach the same conclusion while the "well-actually" crowd in the middle is busy creating those monstrous functions with 17 optional parameters, 9 of which are booleans. And they wonder why nobody wants to maintain their code...

The classic "things are easy when you've mastered them" pattern. Experienced C++ devs saying pointers aren't hard is like billionaires claiming money doesn't matter or supermodels saying looks are irrelevant. Meanwhile, the rest of us are still trying to figure out why our program just segfaulted because we dereferenced a null pointer for the 17th time today. Sure, pointers are "easy" after you've spent 5 years debugging memory leaks and dangling references.