3) Would be true when comparing with pre-C++98, back when C++ compilers shipped pre-processor based macros for writing generic code, and used something like TObject as interface{}.
I had always thought the same thing about high use by aging out coders. Don't know how representative it is but the just released Go annual survey results seem to show that isn't the case.
that's really funny, because I always thought of Go as the language that programmers who were aging out flocked to because it has
1) google-cred
2) familiar algol syntax
3) close enough to C++ to make a run for it
4) (systems-wise) safe enough to make it worth it
5) hip enough that you don't seem like an aging out programmer anymore
(I myself am an aging out programmer, that ironically just got started, so take that as you will)
But my observation is from 5 years ago and things may have changed.