This is a cheap way out. I don't think most people are putting down Go as an outright terrible language.
So, when so many engineers with lots of experience say that, for instance, no-generics is a problem with Go, it's worth considering that may be it really is a problem.
I wonder what you will say if Golang introduces generics in a future release.
> I don't think most people are putting down Go as an outright terrible language.
Beware of evaporative cooling. All the people who can't put up with a lack of generics will wander off, and you'll only be left with people who are okay with the status quo. That doesn't mean you don't have a problem.
No, not quite. Rob Pike said in a video about a year or so ago that now they have enough experience to start thinking about generics. That the process is now just starting and you shouldn't expect them any time soon.
The Go core team has to decide if there's a way to add them to the language in a "Go way." If they can't they won't be added to Go at all, despite what other people want or don't want.
They started making early proposals, with syntax and the associated semantics. It will take a long time, but I'd be very surprised if they changed their mind now.
So, when so many engineers with lots of experience say that, for instance, no-generics is a problem with Go, it's worth considering that may be it really is a problem.
I wonder what you will say if Golang introduces generics in a future release.