> Sorry, your posting is unnecessarily abrasive. Go is a much bigger problem in our industry than the tone of my post. > I have never claimed that Go has the

> Sorry, your posting is unnecessarily abrasive. Go is a much bigger problem in our industry than the tone of my post. > I have never claimed that Go has the most advanced type system. You claimed it had "strict type checking", when it has the least strict type system of any statically-typed language in common usage except C. > But indeed, compared to C/C++ which still are the most commonly used languages in industry, it has a strict type system. With template types, you can definitely get more strict type-checking out of C++ than out of Go. So basically, Go has a more modern type system than C. And that's arguably not true. None of which disproves what I said: I said, "people who like Go only like it because they have no idea what has happened in programming languages for the last few decades." > And it gets work done. You can make that claim about any language. The question is, does it get work done as efficiently as other languages? And the answer is pretty clearly no.