Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are hating BCL because it's not loved by anyone. It's like the poor kid who were supporting the prodigy that is the Borg, but is actually supporting the Borg ecosystem on its back, where the prodigy kid just grab all of the acclaim. That's just typical of almost all human involved affairs. Some dudes hard support but get 20% of what they deserve. Whereas some few get 800%. As for BCL, it literally had no investme…
You could use nearly the same argument to sing the praises of PHP at Facebook. (Or Cobol at banks.) Doesn't make either language any better.
But I sure can tell you a few easy changes for BCL ecosystem can make a huge difference:
* Testing: despite the common knowledge of testing everything, BCL has not testing facility. No man power to support this easy (easy in relative scale) feature.
* Code search: BCL has inheritance like semantic, but no support in code search to navigate the code base. That's ridiculous. If anyone claim Google cpp code can be supported by lack of code searching navigation, then BCL is rightly to be called mysterious and lack sane language design.
* Packaging: BCL is always halg mixed and half separated with executable. That's just plainly stupidity.
* Lack of sane abstraction from Borg: Borg was designed without package concept. Borg's package was entirely an invention by BCL and borgcfg, as an idempotent shell command executed before starting Borg job. Go figure how much a shaky ground BCL is relying on. And how much blame Bcl has to suffer on behalf of Borg's lazy design.