>Then, in the last moment, it got pushed to 1.18 because several deep questions remained open. Delaying a feature to make sure that it's implemented correctly

>Then, in the last moment, it got pushed to 1.18 because several deep questions remained open. Delaying a feature to make sure that it's implemented correctly is the exact the opposite of rushing it! I think you are vastly overestimating the influence of internet message board drama on the actions of the Go core team. In any case, you provide no evidence to support your claims about their motivations. I'm not sure what happened with that Arxiv link, but here is another link to the paper I was thinking of: https://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/wadler/papers/fg/fg.pdf https://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/wadler/papers/fg/fg.pdf The fact that a leading researcher in type systems was a key participant in the effort suggests that this was a carefully thought through proposal (not necessarily perfect or beyond criticism, but not a rush job). Of course, if you think otherwise, you can point to any specific flaws in the paper. >reverse ad hominem The term you're looking for is 'argument from authority'. But argument from authority isn't really a fallacy. It's perfectly sensible to trust authorities, within reasonable limits.