First, yes, I can actually do everything I want in Go or Java. Both are fast enough for DSP, provided that one does not wish to build a library that can be used from multiple other languages. I can also do everything I want to do in Python, if I'm willing to go the numpy/scipy route. If you want to get technical, there are even cases where Java can be faster than C, but this requires a very, very carefully crafted benchmark and is rare to nonexistent in practice. The only place that C+ has a major advantage is advanced 3D math, and this is only because the industries that need advanced 3D math (read: cinematic quality video games) are building on 30 years of code from other people in the same industry, and some of it trickles out into the open source community because people are nice sometimes and do that.
It is easy to get a C++ compiler going and to compile hello world, at least if your definition involves downloading Visual Studio. Cygwin and MinGW require more setup and don't give you access to all of the Windows API. Anything beyond hello world for either C or C++ requires a build system or spending several minutes every time you want to build the software. Such build systems are second programming languages in all cases I'm aware of. Some are even developed for and tied to specific projects.
Your comments about C and C++ are indicating that you do not understand the purpose of the languages, or really even that C is a subset of C++ for all intents. Go code us a game in C++ using C++ as C++. That is, don't just use the C features and call it a day. I'm not even sure where to start with this debate, and I honestly don't want to have it. The problem I have here is that you are publicly all but calling me an idiot while providing information that is demonstrably not true, and you have finally done it on a subject I am definitively very qualified to know about beyond all shadow of a doubt. I do know C and C++ backward and forward. That's what happens when you seriously use a tool for a project that involves over 50 files and, as of right now, about 7000 lines of code. it's also what happens when your entire CS curriculum uses it for your entire college degree, due to being at least somewhat behind the times.
No one reads the standard back to front. No one. The fact that you think this is an appropriate comment indicates that you probably haven't even seen the really dense parts of it, where it degenerates into something that is almost discrete math and you have to cross reference 4 or 5 sections to figure out if the thing you want to do is "allowed". I have never claimed to do this, because it's a normative document and consequently not intended for that purpose. You consult it when you wish to know if something that works on X86 and using Visual Studio is going to work elsewhere, not because you want to know how something works semantically.
In future contact me privately, if you have a personal problem with me. Otherwise, if you think I'm wrong, just say so outright. Attacking me publicly helps no one and gets nowhere. It also leaves me without many good options; I'm not going to allow you to drag me through the mud like this without responding to you. I thought we had managed to come to some sort of tacit arrangement and that this was over, but apparently I was mistaken.
My BlogTwitter: @ajhicks1992