[shadowmint]

The point I was making is that right now go has a poorer set of 3rd party libraries than, for example java or c++, and that means that as a practical target it's not as attractive for people writing particular types of software.

It's patently absurd to argue that because go > C++ on the 'Zen' scale, that it's somehow also > C++ on the 'practicality' scale. These two axes are not totally independent (arguably say, the verbosity of java for example, decreases its value on the practicality scale) but they're weakly related.

Having a toolkit like QT makes C++ a vastly superior choice to go for a desktop application, despite the fact that C++ lies somewhere on the dark depths of hell on the 'Zen' scale.

What I was saying, and agreeing with the OP on, is: Pick your tool for your problem.

In some cases, that's Go. In some its C++. In some it might be java; but not having all those tools lying around that people can pickup to use is a major failing for go.

...and sure, that'll change eventually I'm sure; but it's an entirely valid complaint right now