> It seems to me that the intensity with which some people fixated on the absence of generics cannot be explained just by frustration with writing non-generic

> It seems to me that the intensity with which some people fixated on the absence of generics cannot be explained just by frustration with writing non-generic code, which by all accounts was annoying but not overwhelmingly so. You speak for yourself here! Miles of copy pasted code, slightly altered who knows how, impossible to refactor without either using code generation or eschewing type safety altogether was my experience. Its impossible to write entire classes of general purpose libraries with type safety! Its just beyond belief to me that "copy paste" is an actual, bona fide best practice in the community, or that a 'map' function is unexpressible! > There's also a bit of an anti-expertise "who are you, Go creators, to say you know better than me how to design this program/engage in software development?" Go the compiler/runtime is super impressive! Cross compiling small, binaries with a switch is awesome, so kudos! Go, the language, on the other hand, sucks; it actually sucks so much, that historically, we couldn't even write libraries to work around the things that suck. That is frustrating!