The main point of the article: > One of the things I like about Go is that it offers much better ways to write things that you’d usually write with callbacks.

The main point of the article: > One of the things I like about Go is that it offers much better ways to write things that you’d usually write with callbacks. I fail to see how saying that one likes replacing callbacks with channels translates to saying Go is "perfection incarnate". Go isn't perfect, but they hit a really good subset of features that a lot of people find very productive. I, and many others that use go, find that pragmatism worth the tradeoff. Go makes what my co-workers and I do easier than other languages we've tried. Period. That's why we're using it. That's the reason other's I've communicated with have given as well. It's not a magical unicorn, it's not going to impress PL theorists; it's going to get work done. The lack of generics, or parametric polymorphism, or immutable data structures, or LINQ syntax, pattern matching, etc., isn't keeping us from shipping code.