pietroglyph's point still stands. Well I guess Go is the obvious example to sort-of-refute your assertion, since the designers emphasize simplicity so much. It'

pietroglyph's point still stands. Well I guess Go is the obvious example to sort-of-refute your assertion, since the designers emphasize simplicity so much. It's almost a defining feature of the Go approach, just as the borrow checker could be considered a defining feature of the Rust approach. Of course, the designers of Go made compromises that shift some complexity to the language users and library writers. It seems that many find the result useful. I'm very glad that both approaches are now realized each in a popular language, but like OP I hope Rust won't go too far on the path of increasing complexity, as to me it would then lose its appeal. By the way, it's probably a bit early to say that Go's dependency management system is broken, and anyway it has little to do with the language's complexity.