How to tell if a language is shit

The best way to determine how much a language sucks is by counting how many ``harmful'' parts of the language there are. These are the warts and duplicate features that programmers tell others to avoid. They're usually there for backwards compatibility or to attract programmers from another language. For example, C++ programmers want you to use new, std::vector and functors instead of malloc, arrays and function pointers from C. Why do you need three (malloc/free, new/delete, new[]/delete[]) incompatible allocators and deallocators? Why do you need at least five (C local/static array, malloc, new[], std::vector, std::array) different ways to make contiguous arrays? Why do you need two incompatible ways to pass functions as arguments? Why do C++11 lambdas have unique types? A good language has only one way to make an array, maybe two for expandable and fixed size or heap and stack. A good language has only one way to allocate heap storage for each type of heap (manual/region/GC heap are good distinctions, C heap/C++ heap is not). A good language treats all functions with the same return type and parameter types the same. C++ is shit.

>>11
Exceptions thrown in destructors?  Yeah, right.

Even Python ignores exceptions thrown during __del__.  This is one of the reasons why 99% of C++ programs are complete and utter shit (and so are 99% of C++ programmers who are really just fecal diggers).

The reason you gave for the existence of new[] and delete[] is laughable, considering the frequency of errors even experienced C++ programmers dealing with them.  People avoid them like plague.