I know, I know, what could we possibly learn about C++ in 2008 by reading yet another interview with Bjarne? Well, as it turns out, I did learn some new things, so you can too. Like that the name was chosen to be short because some folks were calling C "old C" to distinguish it from "C with Classes" which was too long to say often. And after quite rightly disclaiming that "what would you do differently if you could do it over" is an unanswerable question, he answers among other things "I would have developed templates (key to C++ style generic programming) before multiple inheritance (not as major a feature as some people seem to consider it) and emphasized exceptions more." Wow! Or how about this quote:

If you look at some of the most successful C++ code, especially as related to general resource management, you tend to find that destructors are central to the design and indispensable. I suspect that the destructor will come to be seen as the most important individual contribution -- all else relies on combinations of language features and techniques in the support of a programming style or combinations of programming styles.

Another way of looking at C++'s legacy is that it made abstraction manageable and affordable in application areas where before people needed to program directly in machine terms, such as bits, bytes, words and addresses.

I do love destructors and deterministic destruction, can't deny it. The article is definitely worth a read!

Kate