[AnimalMuppet]

> But what about the criticisms of the language that are always left unanswered?

I think the article's answer was: Go solves the real problems, not the academic/theoretical problems. But it's fair to ask, how does Go do that? Specifically?

[bad_user]

People claimed that for every programming language in history that was a complete fuck-up, whereas languages with academic/theoretical underpinnings are still alive and relevant.

The true tragedy of our industry are not the technologies we use. The tragedy is that we do not learn from prior mistakes - I was in school and into programming in the nineties and in 20 years things changed, but not that much - people are still debating basically Basic vs Pascal vs C and sometimes it feels like freaking groundhog day, the movie.

(N.B. I'm not criticizing Go here)

[eternalban]

Because unlike, say Java, Go programs crater under complexity. Various attributes of the language, such as the module system, the type system, the visibility model, etc. make it very (very) painful to do architectural space walks.

[NateDad]

Can you explain how those language attributes make projects more difficult to navigate?