It is possible there is malice of some sort involved. However, it is also sufficient to observe that with the way signatures are often done, it is very easy fo

It is possible there is malice of some sort involved. However, it is also sufficient to observe that with the way signatures are often done, it is very easy for someone to write a virus signature against a minority compiler and accidentally write a signature that identifies the output of that compiler, or something that compiler is very likely to output, and not realize it, because all the test cases against the majority compiler executables in the test suite pass just fine. One need not choose one or the other; an accident at the engineer level can be considered a wonderful thing at the business strategy level. But the issue of minority compilers creating target-rich environments for signature writers is a sufficient explanation. (At least for a time; one would think by now the virus test suites would have a good sampling of Go executables by now....)