A note about the second link's table: Free Pascal since version 3.0 does have native unicode support. In fact it has native support for any encoding and it does on-the-fly conversions between different encodings without the programmer having to pay any special attention (but you can use different string types, such as utf8string, if you want the in-memory data to be in a specific encoding).
C++ has also had native unicode support for a while now (made standard in C++11). The table complains that indexing is byte-based, but that's arguably better than the deceptive UTF-16 based indexing many languages have, since UTF-16 code units are not equivalent to unicode code points. Even UTF-32 code points are not equivalent to composed characters or visible gylphs, so character-based indexing makes very little sense unless you're using a Unicode-specific library.
I also wonder why C++ is claimed to have no instance function pointers even though std::bind was available since TR1 and boost::bind was available aeons ago. Did the author confuse C++ style function references with C function pointers? But this is like confusing the C++ std::string (which exist only as a library feature) with C-style char arrays.
