[nine_k]

If #6 is among best practices, I'm sad. I could take a dynamically-typed language instead.

http://talks.golang.org/2013/bestpractices.slide#6

[dscrd]

They allow dynamically typed methods when you need them. Why does that make you sad?

[nine_k]

Loss of strong typing and runtime type detection is what makes me sad.

Well, Go 1 has some of the problems of Java 1: no generics, typecasts from interface{} here and there, simplistic GC. Reasons are probably similar: this all is good enough for version 1, and can later be improved upon.

[kristianp]

"Well, Go 1 has some of the problems of Java 1: no generics, typecasts from interface{} here and there, simplistic GC. Reasons are probably similar: this all is good enough for version 1, and can later be improved upon."

Except I doubt we're going to see generics in Go version 2, whenever that may be. The sentiment against it has been pretty strong in the golang-nuts mailing list.

[Ziomislaw]

anything stopping you?