Missing features is not the problem. A language is just as much what it has as much as what it doesn’t have. But the actual feature-set and lack-of-features Go has for it is ripe for plenty of valid criticism as is.
The post that you're all talking about was replying to someone who attacked everyone criticising Go and called advanced PL features "type system fidget spinners".
Addressing this kind of post doesn't require providing examples of how Go can grow. Also, I don't see why is the bar for criticising Golang's stagnation so much higher than the bar for people that want the language to never change.
