> As far as I can see, whenever the Go team encountered a language feature that could possibly be abused, they always deferred to leaving it out.
All features can be abused.
The Go philosophy is more to leave out features that obscure the meaning and understanding of code (what is also known as "magic").
Also part of the Go philosophy is to not include any feature unless it is clear that its benefits are greater than its costs, and which might interact in unpredictable ways with other existing features.
In other words, the default is to leave things out, rather than to include them, the opposite of a kitchen sink approach.
All features can be abused.
The Go philosophy is more to leave out features that obscure the meaning and understanding of code (what is also known as "magic").
Also part of the Go philosophy is to not include any feature unless it is clear that its benefits are greater than its costs, and which might interact in unpredictable ways with other existing features.
In other words, the default is to leave things out, rather than to include them, the opposite of a kitchen sink approach.