There is a good talk I just watched a few days ago on this topic: Static Versus Dynamic Typing [1][2], which listed the pros and cons of different typing systems, using racket and ocaml as examples:
go statement is just another form of explicit process creation, fork/join pattern. What the author suggested is just similar to cobegin/coend -- implicit process creation.
cobegin/coend are limited to properly nested graphs, however fork/join can express arbitrary functional parallelism (any process flow graph) [1]
Yes, for graceful error handling it needs to form some sort of process tree or ATC(Asynchronous transfer of control), which is implemented in Erlang/OTP and ada programming.
Coincidentally I am just reading the <<Programming in Ada 2012>>, and found this in the introduction chapter:
> C history ... The essence of BCPL was the array and pointer model which abandoned any hope of strong typing and (with hindsight) a proper mathematical model of the mapping of the program onto a computing engine. Even the use of := for assignment was lost in this evolution which reverted to the confusing use of = as in Fortran. Having hijacked = for assignment, C uses == for equality thereby conflicting with several hundred years of mathematical usage. About the only feature of the elegant CPL remaining in C is the unfortunate braces {} and the associated compound statement structure which was abandoned by many other languages in favour of the more reliable bracketed form originally proposed by Algol 68. It is again tragic to observe that Java has used the familiar but awful C style.
[1] https://courses.cs.washington.edu/courses/cse341/18wi/videos...
[2] https://courses.cs.washington.edu/courses/cse341/18wi/videos...