> Go would have a reasonable compile-time type system, except that without > generics you end up having to cast a lot, which renders your compile-time > type sy

> Go would have a reasonable compile-time type system, except that without > generics you end up having to cast a lot, which renders your compile-time > type system almost irrelevant. In my experience of Go, this is not actually true. For example, in the latest project I've been working on, there are 8487 lines of non-test code. In that code, there are a total of 16 dynamic casts, more than half of which are checked (mostly checking for particular error types). There are a total of 4 occurrences which might possibly be amenable to generics. The type system is totally relevant, and checks 99.9% of our code.