If I had any real complaint about the execution of C++ it would probably just be the backwards compatibility with C. Don't get me wrong: I love C, and also I don't think it would've been possible for C++ to have gained so much relevance so fast had it not started as C with Classes. However, it does feel like a lot of kludges in C++ come from its legacy. Something that often confuses beginners is the sheer number of ways to do a thing, and some of them are not recommended to be used at all. With C diverging in incompatible ways from C++, the backwards compatibility has made less sense than ever.
If people wanted an object-orientated compiled language that didn't interlink with and offer a smooth transition from C, there were already alternatives (e.g. Modula).
The direction C++ went was pretty different from even what would've been considered 'object oriented' at the time. I'd say half of what made C++ special was how much stuff could happen purely at compile time.
That's why the sheer insanity of Objective C++ intrigues me.
I always speculated that Jobs went up to the engineers, "hey, we use a lot of Objective C in OS X, right?"
"Yes, sir, Mr. Jobs."
"Well, everyone else, namely Adobe, is using C++ and we need them writing apps for the Mac. We've gotta have those apps. So we're going to need to support that."
"Um, yes sir, Mr. Jobs, we'll get right on that."
He leaves, and they look around nervously. "He's pulling our leg, right?"
