story
I disagree. You should look at OCaml (and Standard ML, though the eqtypes in SML are a botch): generics are dead simple there. Much simpler than Go interfaces, in fact.
Sure, there's always "one more thing" you could add, but that's always true for anything in any language. Slippery slope is a fallacy for this reason.
> or else you force people to use dynamic checks/allocations/casts that reduce your type-safety and bog the code down relative to the "optimal" design
Which is what happens even more if you don't have generics!
