Golang and simplicity in the same sentence does not quite reflects my daily experience.
Want a Set? Golang does not have one, create a map[type]boolean instead.
Want an Enum? Golang does not have one, create a bunch of constants yourself that are not tied together by a type, or create your own type that won't quite make what an Enum is.
If simplicity means feeling like you are programming in the 80's, that is what Golang meant for me with simplicity.
Not having basic stuff such as Set and having to workaround with a map of booleans is not simplicity, as you will have to make it turning the code into a more complex blob to represent the same kind of data structure.
I could go on and on with the list of things that lack instead of things that are simple. </rant>
I recently had to write some Go code and coming from Java/Scala world, actually the "err != nil" thing didn't bother me as much as I thought it would. In fact I liked the explicitness of error handling. However, lack of enums really puzzled me; how is having to go through "iota" hoops simpler than "enum Name { ... choices ... }"? I did like the batteries included approach though - I could build the entire component purely using standard library - not having to deal with importing requests and creating virtualenv etc was refreshing.
Want a Set? Golang does not have one, create a map[type]boolean instead.
Want an Enum? Golang does not have one, create a bunch of constants yourself that are not tied together by a type, or create your own type that won't quite make what an Enum is.
If simplicity means feeling like you are programming in the 80's, that is what Golang meant for me with simplicity.
Not having basic stuff such as Set and having to workaround with a map of booleans is not simplicity, as you will have to make it turning the code into a more complex blob to represent the same kind of data structure.
I could go on and on with the list of things that lack instead of things that are simple. </rant>