>but Go definitely reflects its time, the 2000s
more like the 60s, with a primitive type system, no metaprogramming, no interactive development, etc.
more like the 60s, with a primitive type system, no metaprogramming, no interactive development, etc.
Go's answer to metaprogramming is source code generation. There are many problems with C++ but the existence of the template system isn't one.
Sure, Boost is full of metaprogramming insanity, but with today's C++ standard library it's not necessary to use Boost.
10 years ago template heavy code in C++ did suck, because we had slow compilers, dumb build systems, 7200 rpm HDDs and a need to use Boost to augment the bare bones standard library.
I'll be the first to admit that C++ has decades of cruft and design errors. But the metaprogramming works pretty well now. C++'s current problems are (IMO) weird undefined behavior, e.g. the distinction between POD and non-POD types; having both pointers and references, the ancient exception system, and in general a lack of tools for enforcing memory safety.
What we should talk about instead: hygienic macros in Scheme/Rust, AST-level modification in Nim, dependent types, etc. I think metaprogramming is an aspect of programming that should be explored more, and is definitely useful for reducing boilerplate.