Definitely nothing bad can ever happen with complicated programming techniques.
I don't think many people would call Java 1.5 or C# 2.0 super complicated.
Do you know what Java 1.5 and C# 2.0 had in common, that Go didn't? Generics.
For reference:
- Java 1.5 - release date: September 30, 2004
- C# 2.0 - release date: January 22, 2006
That's ~18 years ago and 16 years ago, for whoever's keeping track.
They did the same for C#, where 2.0 was a breaking change from 1.1.
I still think Go should have bitten the bullet earlier. Though I'm still glad they're doing it now. Just that now there's a ton more code and they're going to divide the ecosystem until adoption is widespread, from the stdlib to every minor corner of the ecosystem that needs it.
What breaking change? They implemented type erasure specifically not to break existing code.
Adding them later is such a big change that touches so much code you can date it into pre generics/post generics:-)
By generics "on their own", I mean essentially the Hindley-Milner type system, which supports generics and can do static type inference in linear time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindley%E2%80%93Milner_type_sy...
Somehow, the "generics wars" in Go made generics into the scapegoat of programming language complexity, when perhaps it was Go's "interfaces" feature all along. Maybe the enemy was here the whole time!