I see this happening with Go, a language with a specific design goal of remaining simple. Generics getting added is OK. I mean, almost every veteran Gopher I'v

I see this happening with Go, a language with a specific design goal of remaining simple. Generics getting added is OK. I mean, almost every veteran Gopher I've talked to agrees that there's been a couple of times, maybe, that they've needed generics and not had them, and that interfaces work fine for 99% of cases. Everyone outside the language insists that it needs generics. But sure, let's add generics for those few times we need it [0]. But then "error handling is too onerous", "there's too much boiler plate", "why can't I code in Go using a functional style?", "Go needs to look more like Ruby", etc, etc. I really hope they keep Go simple and don't cave in to demands to add stuff to it. It doesn't need more syntax. It needs smaller runtimes, a method of determining whether two slices are using the same backing array, and a few other gotchas. I can see a future where there's a "Go classic" forked from 1.17 (or possibly 1.18) that never moves forward, while the main Go gets ever more complex and Java-fied. [0] Except, of course, that as soon as we have generics then every new gopher will insist on using them for everything, and not learn how to use interfaces well instead.