It strikes me how this gives a value proposition for go that is very similar to COBOL: Easy structure, predictable to build and run, minimize individual coding

It strikes me how this gives a value proposition for go that is very similar to COBOL: Easy structure, predictable to build and run, minimize individual coding style differences,.... Not necesarrily disparaging for either lanfuage, as COBOL, boring as it is, has brought tremendous value in large scale software engineering. There are of course big differences too, like i18n, variable width strings, ... But if you give COBOL a c-style syntax,some dynamic size data structures, and you squint a bit, you end up quite close to Go