I still find the most insightful Rob Pike statement (and the one that maybe induces a bit of forgiveness) that can give an idea for why Go is the way it is to be from this slightly older talk:

"The key point here is our programmers are Googlers, they're not researchers. They're typically fairly young, fresh out of school, probably learned Java, maybe learned C or C++, probably learned Python. They're not capable of understanding a brilliant language but we want to use them to be able to build good software. So, the language that we give them has to be easy for them to understand and easy to adopt."

https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Lang-NEXT/Lang-NEXT-2014/Fr... at 20:33

Wow that's really condescending.

yes, but it isn't false

i mean... it's at least a bit surprising. the programming course at my uni (java) got to generics within the first year... i'm sure the hiring requirements at google are a bit higher than that?

and got people worrying about such generic things instead of the problem. It's not the fact that its hard or not, it's just yet another thing to keep in mind when you should be solving issues. Managing time is important, juniors no matter how smart, are juniors because they were not part of the industries before, they are getting the hang of having stuff in production and maintaining it, also managing time to ship, how much "generic" should the code be.

Go just makes you productive by removing lots of things to think about. I'm not saying that generics should or shouldn't be part of v1, I'm just saying that go lacking features to make juniors more productive is a feature

As opposed to us who only use features developed by Bell labs.