> No it isn't, and yes it does. By definition, the more features I add to something, the more complex it becomes. Yes, and go opts to include features that unn

> No it isn't, and yes it does. By definition, the more features I add to something, the more complex it becomes. Yes, and go opts to include features that unnecessarily increase complexity in this manner, such as nil values. > All of these are behavior and operators that are documented in the language spec. So how is any of these a "footgun"? By this logic, no language with a spec can have footguns. C and C++, notorious for their footguns, both specify their behavior in the spec, so do they not have any footguns?