I enjoyed the article but came away frustrated by one thing -- it offers specifics about the problems with Go, but only generalities regarding what is good abou

I enjoyed the article but came away frustrated by one thing -- it offers specifics about the problems with Go, but only generalities regarding what is good about Go. I haven't tried Go, but I'm aware of things that seem like short-comings to me (most especially, the lack of exceptions). So I understood the first part of the article. The second part was vague ... I could tell that the author decided that all those problems were OK, but I don't really know how that happened. He chalked it up to the "way of Go". I'd really like to hear some concrete descriptions of what that is.