> never mind than MANY people dont need generics, and that generics have a significant compilation and runtime cost, in terms of time and memory. who cares rig

> never mind than MANY people dont need generics, and that generics have a significant compilation and runtime cost, in terms of time and memory. who cares right? I'm saying that I wanted them...? I didn't say need. I was able to operate without them. I simply _wanted_ them. Also maybe consider the way you're communicating? I didn't say Go was wrong. I said I didn't enjoy it. I'm allowed to not like things, and I'm allowed to post about them. _Also_ this concept of "need" is amusing to me. You don't _need_ a garbage collector, or a statically linked binary, or static typing, or IDE support, or a debugger, or, or ,or. And yet, people _want_ them. > and never mind that Go has had generics for over a year now right? Their generics implementation is pretty bad IME. Interfaces lacking type parameters seems pretty untenable to me. I'd rather just not use them. > sometimes having a small, stripped down language Of all the things Go is, I wouldn't say its either of these. But also, if you respond, please try to not be so defensive. You can like Go, that is a valid thing to do.