this is a repeating pattern with languages; there's no commitment to design coherency, no governance, just a mad scamper to stuff features into the project until it becomes an absurd caricature of itself.
C++ did it so egregiously & disastrously you'd think language maintainers would have been scared straight. No, like moths to a flame, it is the preferred hill to die on.
This is how C99 keeps winning when it bleeping should not. It's settled science, however imperfect. It's not getting rearranged because someone read a blog post. It has stability in real-world clock-on-the-wall terms like nothing else.
The change made in Go 1.22 for 3-clause-for loops is not a new feature. It simply broke backward compatibility and old Go principles. It is much worse than C++'s stuff features.
Are you actually aware of any breakages this change has caused?
> All the examples in that article are very exotic.
Have you carefully read that article? All? You must be kidding. The article shows several cases used in practice.