corresponds fairly closely with

> a "nursery", which is just a wrapped sync.WaitGroup/pthread_join/futures::future::join_all/a reactor that waits for all tasks to terminate/etc.

The fact that the 'nursery' can and has been implemented with more 'primitive' constructs is actually a point of similarity with goto/structured programming not a point of difference. The GP didn't seem to spot this, despite making it their first complaint, so it was good that the post you're responding to did.

The post you're responding to is not calling the GP a dummy because of a disagreement, it's pointing out the apparent criticism the GP levelled was exactly the same criticism levelled against structured programming, and ultimately goto lost.