What is the right site to post a question about why a particular language does or doesn't support certain features, for example:
Why doesn't GoLang support inheritance? What were technological/language design factors involved in this decision?
Meta Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for meta-discussion of the Stack Exchange family of Q&A websites. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
As stated, this question is about the history of programming, and should be asked on Stack Overflow.
However, it is often a more interesting question to ask not what factors motivated the actual decision (such as: the main advocate of inheritance was off sick during the meeting), but what good reasons a language with this design could have to include or exclude the feature. This question is about the science of programming language design (such as it is), and belongs on Computer Science.
Beware that a part of the Stack Overflow community is used to discussions about language being based on religion rather than science, and thus tend to look down on questions about this topic as opinion-based (even though they aren't — both historical facts and mathematical and engineering considerations are subject to rational analysis). So asking on Stack Overflow incurs the risk of useless answers like “because inheritance is bad and you should be ashamed” or of having the question closed.
There is no site on SE where that would be an acceptable question.
Those types of questions could be very primarily opinion-based. They are not about a specific problem. The only answer that would really be acceptable is if the creators of the language left an answer explaining why.
The only other acceptable answers would include a link to some other site other than SE that would quote that site, and that site would have to quote the creators of the language where they say why it was not supported, etc.
These questions have no place here, because they always lead to speculation. In most cases (the occasional Eric Lippert post being the exception that proves the rule), the people who know aren't here to answer.
Some claim that language design is so scientific that these question can be answered by principle. There's a reason why some of us see this as religion. There is no evidence that the historical decisions under C, and C++, and Java, and ..., were the result of science as opposed to art or religion. Just because language design can be done scientifically doesn't mean that it was, and so asking why the ^ or % characters were chosen for operators, or any number of other pointless explorations of inaccessible history, just doesn't get us anywhere.
This question, as written, is not appropriate for Stack Overflow (@Gilles reasons notwithstanding).
In most cases, the number of people making decisions for a language is very low, and so the number of people who would even begin to know an answer would be very low, and that isn't to mention the people who think they know the answer injecting their opinion into the mix.
If you'd like to know why an architectural decision was made for a language, email the language designer or ask on their forums.
Incidentally, it looks like you asked a similar question on programmers, and it was well received, so maybe it's a better place for it than Stack Overflow?
If I were to replace only one word in your question (GOLang -> VBA) I am pretty sure you wouldn't need a Microsoft official to answer it even though Microsoft invented VBA. Some professionals with X many years of experience in the field, proper developers not people who happened to record a macro and modify it to their needs could answer the question for you.
Maybe the answer wouldn't be credible (like it didn't come directly from the inventor) but it would give you very good insights about why, when, how, etc. and justification on the scientific background ( ie. VBA was derived from VB6 - it can't support Inheritance because ... ) Not all answers on Stack Overflow reflect the truth, I happen to see OK, highly upvoted answers which don't actually explain the great detail nor depth.
I agree it probably requires the developer of the language to provide a 100% credible answer not a speculation but I guess it also depends on the language itself. I personally find this question suitable for Stack Overflow and if came across it would probably upvote it (only if it had more content in it - some resources indicating this or that, some justification) :)