> biased because only those who had a problem submitted proposals and this leaves out all of the developers who don’t consider error handling in Go needs to be better
It's probably also biased due to the people who gave up on Go completely because they saw it as a sufficiently major issue and/or had little faith in Go ever improving (I can't exactly put a finger on it, but a lot of the decisions in Go seem to be backed by "... and if you don't like our approach, you're WRONG").
> a lot of the decisions in Go seem to be backed by "... and if you don't like our approach, you're WRONG"
I don't understand this complain. Ultimately that's how most if not all programming languages are developed.
A few individuals act as guide and gatekeepers and that's fine.
It's probably also biased due to the people who gave up on Go completely because they saw it as a sufficiently major issue and/or had little faith in Go ever improving (I can't exactly put a finger on it, but a lot of the decisions in Go seem to be backed by "... and if you don't like our approach, you're WRONG").