I guess I should have been more clear that I mean actions that have resulted from the feedback. Sure, the survey brings out the concerns in a structured form, b

I guess I should have been more clear that I mean actions that have resulted from the feedback. Sure, the survey brings out the concerns in a structured form, but to anyone who has seen more than a few discussions about Go, the feedback regarding error handling or enum or sum types etc would not have been news. I can't imagine Go team at Google is stunned by developer demand for these things. Question is why there hasn't been a concerted effort to prioritize these top concerns (I will stand corrected if there is already something underway that I'm not aware of). One of the proposals you linked has been raised in 2017 and it is still open with "No one assigned"; same fate for the other item. That doesn't inspire confidence in terms of Go team treating these things as top priority. I think stuff developers are moaning about the most should be top priority but I guess that is just my simpleton thinking. > I think the problem is not the lack of will on the part of the Go team, but rather that these issues are not easy to fix in a way that fits the language and doesn't cause too many issues with backwards compatibility. They have made many changes to the language, some significant ones like Generics (which I would assume was also not an easy problem to solve) while they have largely left the elephant in the room unaddressed i.e. error handling - and the developers deal with that one on a daily basis and I would wager a lot more frequently compared to Generics. If I had to gauge their priority, I would go by where they they are putting their money instead of surveys and proposals. And their priorities seem to be different from what the populace is asking. And that is my point.