> At runtime however they are simply passed as interface{} values wrapping the real values since the type soundness already has been proven. So, this is some s

> At runtime however they are simply passed as interface{} values wrapping the real values since the type soundness already has been proven. So, this is some sort of limited Java-like generics with type erasure? As someone who has only dabbled shortly with Go just to find out that he prefers a slightly more complex language, I find this sort of proposals tyring. I'd reconsider using Go if they finally got this thing right, but until then ... I personnally would find the lack of generics acceptable, if go had (some sort of) algebraic types. But since the go team thinks these are useless either ... In some room in some building this probably makes some sense.