I have nothing against C++, Rust, or Go--I like all of them for different reasons and see them serving different goals, and see room for all sorts of languages.

I have nothing against C++, Rust, or Go--I like all of them for different reasons and see them serving different goals, and see room for all sorts of languages. I also agree that there's a discrepancy between how Rust is discussed and how it is used, and don't see C++ going anywhere for a long time. However, I think that post from Reddit was a bit misleading in its own way. Go has been much more mature from the beginning, given its authors and origins, and in some ways had an easier target, in being a slower but simpler, safer version of C, or a faster version of Python (as far as new users of the language are concerned). It's also in many ways sort of a modern version of C, so very familiar to potential users. Finally, it had its 1.0 release in 2012. Rust, in contrast, had less of a head start. It is newer in a lot of ways in terms of its characteristics and features, and had a more difficult target, at the lower level and with the performance characteristics of C++. Finally, its 1.0 release wasn't until [less than] 2 years ago, in 2015. Go has been post-1.0 for over twice as long as Rust, which is a significant length of time in IT.