You are being deliberately negative here. Choosing to forego generics in favor of simplicity (and its impact along several axes) is a postcard example of a compromise. It is a tough choice that many people will be unhappy with, but there are also many Go programmers that are extremely satisfied with that direction.
As for acknowledging, well, they have always been very clear about their position. It makes no sense to spend a decade answering the same question over and over with a long and elaborate response which the person asking has already seen and dismissed. I can understand them becoming condescending after a decade of facing people who act with a deliberately obtuse and holier-than-thou attitude.
It's not like they have been lazy - every release of Go has had a large amount of improvements that matter. Working on generics would have meant sacrificing a (probably large) amount of them.
As for acknowledging, well, they have always been very clear about their position. It makes no sense to spend a decade answering the same question over and over with a long and elaborate response which the person asking has already seen and dismissed. I can understand them becoming condescending after a decade of facing people who act with a deliberately obtuse and holier-than-thou attitude.
It's not like they have been lazy - every release of Go has had a large amount of improvements that matter. Working on generics would have meant sacrificing a (probably large) amount of them.
(for the record, I dearly miss generics too!)