[necovek]

You seem to ask for "ideological bias" and then discount all the brought up examples as "impractical" at the same time.

For example, I may dislike a language simply because it has no significant white-space: I just like a programming language to display nicely, for my definition of "nicely". I do understand practical tradeoffs of significant whitespace, yet I still like it: those are not in opposition with each other.

[philosopher1234]

Your definition of nicely and it’s origin can be examined. We can also question what it means for a programming language to be good or bad.

[necovek]

This thread started off with

> ...my ideological biases against Go

which you turned into a question of whether Go is a good or bad language. That was never brought up.

An idealogical bias against Go could be that it was conceived by Google, and that you reject to support increasing Google's influence on the world.

This has nothing to do with Go being technically good or bad.

[philosopher1234]

Ok, sure, my terminology could have been more accurate, but I’ve been having perfectly functional conversations with everyone else, so I’m not sure what you’re getting at.

[necovek]

None of it seems to have been "functional conversations with everyone else", but instead you asking questions after "ideological biases" were brought up and then dismissing all the answers as irrelevant because they are not clearing any of your "practical" bars.

That was at least my impression, and I fully admit that I may have gotten it wrong (I have no skin in this game, I am just portraying what your "conversations" looked like from the sidelines).