My point today is that, if we wish to count lines of code, we should not regard them as "lines produced" but as "lines spent": the current conventional wisdom is so foolish as to book that count on the wrong side of the ledger.
https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD10xx/E...
Except I think people have often overly focused on "lines of code" as the unit for this metric, leading many to overrate terse code, even when it is very dense.
But I'm not sure what wording would capture this idea succinctly enough to include it in a pithy quote.
APL (and it's many cousins) is a bridge too far for me, but I can see the appeal to having the entire program on a single screen.
In one short letter he makes an insightful critique yet misses the the point so hard I can practically hear the woosh 42 years later.
It's funny that you used Go as an example. Like 60% of its raison d'être is noticing that more lines of code is often better if each line is simple. And I think it's mostly right about that. Its inscrutable naming conventions are, on the other hand, a poor choice. (Notwithstanding that java's are a poor choice in the opposite direction.)