("AnonymousField" is the name they give to it. But it's inheritance. Badly executed and doesn't fit well in the type system, but that's par for the course for Go)
I don't get where these statements keep coming from. Well, I do, to an extent : the Go authors keep claiming these sorts of things, but I don't understand why. They're not true. There is no complex language feature that Go does not have. Go has inheritance, Go has generics (simply inaccessible for everyone except the language authors, like in modula-2), Go has polymorphism (simply inaccessible for "mere" users). Go has return-value polymorphism. Go has type parameters, both in types and functions (again, inaccessible for users of the language, but it's there).
Everything is simply built as custom compiler code that's inconsistent and riddled with unexpected edge cases, none of it worked into the type system itself. This is the real reason for resistance against these language features : working them into the type system would be a necessity, and isn't possible without breakage because they're not consistent.
