My example question was actually in regards to Go, made public in 2009, with 14 years of history.
The bonus round of the same question would be, "name one feature that was removed before 1.0".
We could make this question even more fun, if taking into account gccgo specific extensions, or runtime changes as well.
To put it bluntly, if someone shows up calling themselves an expert, I expect World Cup skills towards the language they are an expert on, across all levels.
While it may not be strictly correct semantically, I'd expect most people to understand "Go expert" as "expert Go programmer", not as some sort of Go historian.
The bonus round of the same question would be, "name one feature that was removed before 1.0".
We could make this question even more fun, if taking into account gccgo specific extensions, or runtime changes as well.
To put it bluntly, if someone shows up calling themselves an expert, I expect World Cup skills towards the language they are an expert on, across all levels.