D, Go, Vala, and Rust: A new generation of native languages
drdobbs.com
drdobbs.com
"Boxes, which can be owned by only one owner, contain the data."
We usually use "box" to mean "task-local data", which can't move. (Some of us are trying to drift away from the "box" terminology altogether, since it's potentially confusing -- "GC data" or "task-local data" is easier.) Generally we use the term "uniquely-owned data" for data that's intended to move from task to task.
"This is conceptually similar to mutexes, but with an orderly transfer of control and no option for waiting for a box."
The comparison to mutexes is puzzling; mutexes are for protecting access to shared data, while unique pointers are for transfer of ownership of data with a single owner. In any case, you can wait for uniquely-owned data to arrive on a channel; just use the blocking receive function.
"Right now, it appears to be the product of a single individual."
This is simply untrue. We have about a half-dozen core Rust developers in Research and several community contributors. Most of us have other responsibilities, but Rust is one of the top priorities of the research team as a group. The commit logs [1] reflect this.
To recap:
1/2 (2 out of 4) of the namedrops are of dead languages/communities.
The other 1/2 are about languages that don't have much in common in terms of specialization and purpose (Rust and Go).
Focusing on "native" languages is a pretty meaningless delineation anyway.
Vala sounds like Objective-C (although I'm sure its syntax is less retarded). If people are going to spend time learning some enhanced flavor of C, they might as well learn the more-marketable Objective-C.