go has null and has modifiable function parameters. The first thing is a reintroduction of billion dollar mistake [1] which is not acceptable in 21-st century.

go has null and has modifiable function parameters. The first thing is a reintroduction of billion dollar mistake [1] which is not acceptable in 21-st century. It was acceptable when Hoare did that because noone knew better then. It is not acceptable now. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Hoare#Apologies_and_retractions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Hoare#Apologies_and_retra... The second point means that some predicate on locally constructed and held data that is true before calling a function with that data as parameters, may not be true after return from a call. These two "features" of a language make language hard to use. Instead of thinking about bigger things, you think about whether you may have NULL or not in this variable after that call to that function. In my not so humble opinion, taking OCaml and bolting on it type constructors (monads for hand-made channels, software transactional memory, etc, and even more than monads) could been better choice than reimplementing Simula on Plan 9, poorly. And I do not like OCaml at all. As per "unimportant cog" argument, I can only say that some companies recognize(d) talents in different areas. AFAIR, IBM used to have parallel ladders for officing-oriented and engineering people, with comparable salaries on comparable levels. I believe it is a good thing.