[kalcode]

> So based on the article's own observation: no, of course not.

This had very little to the discussion. Of course it can't be replaced. Code is created by humans, and as long as we have opinions nothing gets truly replaced. Just decreased usage over time.

> C++ and Switft just became "more dominant".

Yup, like this. Of course a general statement is no.

I have very little interest in this topic. But I seen this SAME comment a million times on anything thats new that attempts to challenge something. And as usual whether something "dethrones" something is less interesting than what changes or ideas that it offers.

Just like ALL those you listed, they didn't replace any of those, but they definitely challenged the ecosystems, or improved the old ones.

Naunce discussion is far more interesting.

For example, why do you think Carbon won't be able to gain dominance over time? I mean I think thats a huge hurdle too.

[TheRealPomax]

You've apparently read the reverse of what I said. I said the new thing didn't replace the old thing, and that therefore the idea that "we are doing the same, and it will replace the old thing" is nonsense. I did not say that because it can't replace it, it is therefore not worth doing. It absolutely is, like all attempts at making things that "solve the problems that C++ has" have been varying degrees of worth it. But the idea that it can, let alone will, replace the original is such an obvious "no" that the title is clickbait. Or slide-bait (since it was originally a conf. talk)