> Nah… if so was embracing C# style complexity I would rather do Swift of Rust. Just so we're clear here, you're using the word "complexity" to describe the si

> Nah… if so was embracing C# style complexity I would rather do Swift of Rust. Just so we're clear here, you're using the word "complexity" to describe the situation of not having to copy paste or `go generate` 30 different implementations of the same class for different types because your language lacks generics.