I'm not sure how to take that review given that his two main complaints seem to be:
1) That Go has i++ and not ++i. Don't even know what to say to someone who thinks this a major issue, really.
2) That the declaration syntax is 'unattractive' and different from other languages. Yes, the syntax looks a bit strange at first if you are used to C, but it is unquestionably cleaner and better, specially in more complex declarations. This is even covered in the FAQ: http://golang.org/doc/go_faq.html#declarations_backwards
His other complaints seem to be about the name of the language and how much some of the Go documentation acknowledges the influences of certain languages, which as he himself says, is just politics and not really relevant to the language itself.
At the same time there seems to be plenty of people who actually have used Go and love it, including the designers of other languages:
1) That Go has i++ and not ++i. Don't even know what to say to someone who thinks this a major issue, really.
2) That the declaration syntax is 'unattractive' and different from other languages. Yes, the syntax looks a bit strange at first if you are used to C, but it is unquestionably cleaner and better, specially in more complex declarations. This is even covered in the FAQ: http://golang.org/doc/go_faq.html#declarations_backwards
His other complaints seem to be about the name of the language and how much some of the Go documentation acknowledges the influences of certain languages, which as he himself says, is just politics and not really relevant to the language itself.
At the same time there seems to be plenty of people who actually have used Go and love it, including the designers of other languages:
http://go-lang.cat-v.org/quotes