[entha_saava]

1) Non nullability can be implemented in language without generics, and for all types instead of just pointer types. That can be used to enforce null checking with pattern like:

    if let var_name = nullable_var { 
        // use var_name as non nullable
    } else {
        // nullable_var in null, handle null case
    }

And any tagged union can be reduced to nullable of member type without pattern matching, with some specific syntax. It is not hard with an imperative language.

2) Without generics, you are probably reinventing the same code, or using reflection which is not even type safe, or worse, using code generation. For instance D has generics AND good compile times. I guess Nim compiles fairly well too. Or you can choose partially type erasure based generics with a different tradeoff. There is no point in not having useful generic functions on generic data structures in a language that came in 2000s.

Once write Python or ruby or something and come back to Go. People without knowledge of other languages with generics tend to think you are writing for loop in while loop in if - else break monstrosity because native compilation and performance come with a cost in expressiveness, while it need not be.

[jfkebwjsbx]

There is nothing wrong with code generation, what do you mean by "or worse"?

[centril]

Off the top of my head: Poor error messages, any type checking is run on the generated code so harder to enforce properties, and if code generation is not in-language, then the base logic can diverge for different types, which is bad when you find bugs.