I like the article. It is well written and very informative. However, one could just omit the word "Not" in the title, becoming "Why Go Is Good", and it would s

I like the article. It is well written and very informative. However, one could just omit the word "Not" in the title, becoming "Why Go Is Good", and it would still be a valid article. In short, the author just points out features that Go could have but doesn't, which is not a good argument for saying that Go is "unconditionally" bad. All those missing features are missing on purpose, they are not bugs nor there is some kind of inherent defect in the language. To me, the only two things that really bother me in Go are: 1) sometimes, the lack of generics, particularly when dealing with data structures and 2) the lack of a proper and official dependency manager. (The go tool has so many officially supported auxiliary tools, why not also a dep manager supporting versions etc.?)