I'm not being negative. I was confused by the unfamiliar anthropomorphic terminology being applied to an artifact. I take away a sense that "opinionated" seems to be an idiom popular within the golang community for a sense of principled design along the lines of Smalltalk's message passing, Lisp's homoiconicity, Haskell's purity from side effects, and so on.

> I'm not being negative.

I was. My previous message is an arbitrary combination of HN clichés, of which "opinionated" is one. It's gibberish, devoid of content but written in a fashionable way. It got zero down-votes so far. Maybe something to think about.

I felt like I owed the world a response to your question even though the first sentence made no sense to me whatsoever. I guess that "opinionated" makes no less sense as a characterization of an artifact than "ambitious" or "stupid" does, so I'm going to have to learn to live with it, but it's one of those things like "performant" or "impactful" that will make me cringe if I ever catch myself saying it. Anyway, thanks for the response, my comrade-in-downvotes.

"opinionated" is just shorthand for "the language authors held strong opinions when designing". There's no anthropomorphism so hopefully that takes away the confusion.