There are just the N ways PL research has found for implementing generics. Either they implement them, and tackle the complication one of those N ways entails, or they don't.
Besides, has anyone seen much experiments, with actual coding or at least design, for finding this "non-complicated" way anyway? Not just some post once in a blue moon re-iterating the basic well known tradeoffs.
Yeah, I've read both -- and more. None of this is what I described: either actual code, even if in some experimental compiler branch/fork, or at least a concrete design.
Ian's just reiterates the various options (Rob Pike has already written similar things), and Russ Cox is just several vague ideas for future additions to the language.
So, Russ says it is Ok to have generics but there are higher priorities. The problem with this approach is that eventually when they will add generics, there will be whole ecosystem living without them, which means this ecosystem will need to be entirely reimplemented.
There are just the N ways PL research has found for implementing generics. Either they implement them, and tackle the complication one of those N ways entails, or they don't.
Besides, has anyone seen much experiments, with actual coding or at least design, for finding this "non-complicated" way anyway? Not just some post once in a blue moon re-iterating the basic well known tradeoffs.