[abatilo]

Speaking for myself, the language itself is simple. There aren't a lot of features, which means you do have to write more and it's more verbose, but learning the entirety of the language's features is very easy to do.

Even with the relative magic of things like init functions that execute on import, there's so much less magic that you have to consider.

IMO it's the easiest to jump into for this reason. Yes, the code itself might be excessive, but reading Go is as simple as can be.

[ericbarrett]

I'll echo this. When I'm looking at a Go codebase that somebody else wrote, it's a minimal effort to understand what it does. Rarely, if ever, do I scratch my head at a particularly clever type derivation or obscure language feature; macros are pretty much non-existent; even user-defined types are easily reduced by the IDE and language server. Patterns are standardized and yes, it's verbose, but predictably so. If something calls for containerization, it's dead simple. Go is a language for getting things done straightforwardly.

I know it's not everybody's cup of tea, and that's fine. There's room for different languages in the world. But I'm knocking out useful utilities that make a difference for my team and business in days or hours, and supremely uninterested in code golf, so I don't personally agree with the criticisms.