I'm not saying Go's design is dumb, it's obviously successful at what it set out to do. I'm not trying to be dishonest or insulting. I've described the philos

I'm not saying Go's design is dumb, it's obviously successful at what it set out to do. I'm not trying to be dishonest or insulting. I've described the philosophy of the language in exactly those terms to Go users, in person, and gotten nods of "Yes, that's right, that's why it works." I think it's more dishonest to claim that the language designers didn't intentionally limit the language to less than the state of the art as of 30 years ago, on purpose, because of concerns about the mental capacity of users. They themselves admit as much.