Have you actually built any real projects in Go? Because pretty much everyone I know who has tried (and who has learned enough Go to write minimally idiomatic code) has found this to be a non-issue.
Not all languages are the same, and not every "feature" makes as much sense in every language.
Before using it in a real project, it is obvious to do some research, isn't it?
So some questions and concerns arise, naturally. Regarding generics, I really don't like what Go offers instead [1].
By the way, creators themselves haven't eliminated the chance of adding generics in later versions of the language [2].
Also, I don't understand why not have destructors (deterministic, not the finalizer...) in many cases where currently `defer` is used.
I also don't like the trick you have to do for checking the interface integrity [3].
All in all, I have a sympathy for Go, lets see what will happen in 2.0.
No Generics! Why on earth would you write code in this language? Enjoy re-writing your tree and unordered-set containers for every different datatype you wish to use.
(And dont tell me using interface{} is an alternative because you lose type safety and speed.)
I would have loved to have scene what Rob would have said in the next hour. I feel like every time I see a talk or slides about Go, I get giddy that I might get to see more patterns or more "good ways to use channels effectively". I enjoy Go but I still find myself writing things several times with channels before it's as clean an readable as I like.
http://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2012/06/less-is-exponentia...