[NateDad]

My expectation is that they'll end up giving us something that'll make it easier to work around the lack of generics, but I don't know about getting actually full-on generics. Honestly, I don't want them - they make it way too easy to make overly complex code.... much like class inheritance. I've been developing for 14 years and can count on one hand the number of times I needed something like a tree or graph. Certainly, if you're working on scientific or mathematic projects, you may use them every day of the week, but if so, maybe Go isn't the right language for you, and honestly, it doesn't have to be everything to everyone.

[burntsushi]

I'm skeptical that trees and graphs are the only thing generics are good for, but, I've published research with open source software written in Go.[1] I've also done it for Haskell.[2] I just try not to pigeonhole languages and learn as much as I can about different paradigms. In my experience, they all have something useful to offer beyond trees and graphs.

[1] - https://github.com/BurntSushi/cablastp

[2] - https://github.com/ndaniels/mrfy