I actually got the impression that the C++ and Go camps were pretty happy to see the competition and conversation. Those 4 languages are a pretty good cross sec

I actually got the impression that the C++ and Go camps were pretty happy to see the competition and conversation. Those 4 languages are a pretty good cross section of the state of "systems programming" and I don't think any of them really feel that there isn't room, in the near future at least, for all of their offerings. I think D and Rust will both be fairly well received (if they aren't already), if only for their perspective on memory management. Andrei hopefully doesn't need salesman like qualities. I hope that there will be enough D evangelists to do the selling for him. Rust will hopefully be hugely successful, but if not, the ideas it espoused will certainly be developed further by future languages. Those 4 languages are aiming at different targets (I think Rust and D would be aiming at the most common group). C++ is looking to gain the ability to do "modern things" in C++ without confusing existing C++ devs, Go is looking to attract devs who want to do modern stuff with a tiny ramp-up cost (low cognitive over-head, low time-to-productivity, brilliant standard library, native concurrency primitives) whereas D and Rust are both offering languages with more "modern" features that may be theoretically sound, but don't have as much proven use in production code. These differences are blurred, and the languages obviously do have cross-over in terms of features and paradigms, but I doubt they're truly competing for many jobs yet. They all have their place, depending on what you're trying to achieve.