You don't fool anybody, the subject didn't come up untill you brought it. The thread is about a site that shows examples of Go code and explains them, there's no discussion about the advantages or disadvantages of their design decisions, just matter of fact statements.

Of course, you can do whatever you want, but that doesn't mean that the rest of us won't probably look at your comments thinking "Here come the generics whiners again" and look in the other direction. You are alienating your audience with your indiscriminate repetition.

And, if the disclaimer helps you, I'd like generics in Go, they are useful sometimes. I just don't see the point in such zealotry over something which is merely convenient.

If only there were a workaround for not having generics, sigh.

But seriously, they may not implement generics out of spite or just to troll generics zealots.

Edit: remove ambiguity

I recently added the statement "type T interface{}" to a piece of code, as a private joke about the generics-in-go talk.

now my code looks like "func map(x []T, f func(T) T)" and everybody's happy :)

I firmly believe that when Go introduces generics, the syntax should look like:

type T1 generic type T2 generic

func Map(f func(T1) T2, s []T1) []T2

I'm not sure what you think I'm trying to fool people about. When Go comes up, I sometimes want to talk about how good I think it is. I hope you don't think I'm trying to hide that. It is pretty common on HN to comment on the merits of a thing when the thing itself comes up, even if said merits are not the specific subject of the link.

I can see that I am putting some people off with my commentary, but other people apparently got new information. Hard to say whether this is a win or loss on net. Time will tell, sooner or later.