I don't know anything about CLU. ML compilers are a mixed bag. OCaml (which is a different dialect, of course), has an acceptably fast compiler, but it's not near-instant like Go. Ada compilers are famous for being slow, at least historically. C# is, again, acceptably quick to compile, but not as quick as Go. I don't know about D. I've heard good things about Delphi's compile times, but no-one uses it now.
In that comparison you forgot the part of turning off optimizations so that the code quality is similar to what Go standard compiler spends time doing.
The compilation speed drop is easily seen when using gccgo instead.
A side note for Delphi, it is still relatively used in European enterprises, with an yearly conference in Germany.
And I could have mentioned other languages like Eiffel, with their mixed JIT for development and AOT via C compilers for final delivery.
No, I know all of the languages that you mentioned except CLU. And since I don't think there are even any practical CLU implementations available for modern hardware, I'm not sure how you are able to compare CLU compile times to Go compile times. Are you maintaining a legacy CLU codebase or something?
Now, if there are scientific comparisons available, I'll happily defer to those. But unless you spend inordinate amounts of your time comparing compile times between languages, I doubt that you have any scientific info to go on either.
> I don't know about D. I've heard good things about Delphi's compile times
Doesn't look like actually knowing them to me.
> Are you maintaining a legacy CLU codebase or something?
No, just you are apparently stating that a CLU compiler developed to be usable in 1971 hardware will run slower than Go on 2018 hardware, which doesn't make much sense.
Talking numbers, D was taking 1.24s to compile its complete standard library in 2010, (too lazy to try out the latest version) including the piles of template code that it has.