> Unfortunately, I am all too well aware of why these decisions were made, and it is exactly one reason: Compatibility with legacy code. C++ has no editions system, no way to deprecate core language features.
Actually, I'm curious if somebody is working on a flavor of the modern C++ that abandons backward compatibility ?
The Carbon project feels like a completely new language. What I'd expect instead is something that adopts best features and practices from modern C++, so that an average C++ project would require just minor changes to migrate, in spirit of Python 2 -> 3 migration.
Have you looked at the CppFront[1] project by Herb Sutter? It's less of a completely new language like Carbon. It's meant to be C++ with a "nicer" syntax, while providing 100% linking compatibility, and with 100% source backward compatibility available when desired.