> Isolated each item is trivial in some context, its the exclusive set that is non-trivial, or at least uncommon.
I'm not just taking it in isolation for no reason. If you have static linking, you basically have HTTPS by consequence.
> The fact https is included in the standard library means that you can give a new user a hello world tutorial that includes producing a web server. It's a huge boon to productivity in a programming language to have a default path for such libraries.
I think you're taking our discussion as if it were about if the language is cool or not. I never argued against that.
> I'm not just taking it in isolation for no reason. If you have static linking, you basically have HTTPS by consequence.
Can you clarify what you mean by this because to me there is literally nothing about static linking that implies https as a consequence. The point about Go is centrally not that it uniquely has access to an https library.
The point is that it is included. This may not at first appear all that noteworthy, but this is a substantive quality of life improvement. The standard library not only provides a vary large set of common functionality it is packaged with the distribution, works on all the platforms supported by Go without user intervention, and is bound in lock step to the release version of the compiler.
I'm not just taking it in isolation for no reason. If you have static linking, you basically have HTTPS by consequence.
> The fact https is included in the standard library means that you can give a new user a hello world tutorial that includes producing a web server. It's a huge boon to productivity in a programming language to have a default path for such libraries.
I think you're taking our discussion as if it were about if the language is cool or not. I never argued against that.