Group (3), of which I am a member:<p>If the developers take a specific principled stance against $really_useful_feature on account that it would introduce complexity and thus degrade performance, then compromise this same principle in order to accomplish $entirely_unnecessary_port, it put the obvious lie to their avowed principles.<p>I don&#x27;t mind that go compiles more slowly. To Thomas&#x27;s point, it&#x27;s still really fast. What I mind is that a good portion of the go community has accepted the lack of generics on the basis of principles that they haphazardly violated in order to scratch the useless but fun intellectual itch of bootstrapping the compiler.<p>Now that they&#x27;ve done this, they have revealed themselves to be entirely dishonest about their complexity&#x2F;performance principles, and now the one legitimate objection that has kept generics out of the language has nothing to stand on.<p>Again, I don&#x27;t care about performance per se, I care about dishonesty and hypocrisy in the platform&#x27;s objectives.