I find generics are overused in most languages. Go will be getting generics to handle the very few situations in which they are a genuine value. But the most common uses cases for generics in other langues are already handled by Go interfaces.

For example Go's `sort.Interface` provides a mechanism to implement generic sort, find and set operations on any type of collection that implements those three methods (Len, Swap, and Less).

I nearly never find myself having to use `interface{}` in my Go code, and those that do usually don't have to, they just don't want to define an appropriate interface.

Generics are coming in next version, go 1.18 in around 6 months ;)

There is nothing wrong with a well documented interface. The `is-a` pattern and `has-a` pattern are all I have ever needed when composing "objects" in golang.

I dread the appearance of generics. It's not just that they lead to longer compile times for very little benefit, it's that everybody wants every thing to be generic, just in case. Like the C++ dogmas around how many of which type of constructor you need, generics encourage fast-spreading, deleterious memes.

The "better way" is coming in an upcoming go release (generics)

instead of taking an empty interface, take an interface with defined methods. Then the caller can conform their type to whatever the API needs.

Well they will be landing pretty soon