[crazypython]

> a strong type system

It's a myth that dynamic languages can't have strong types. Python aborts almost immediately whenever it can. For instance, adding a number to a string? Exception. Accessing undefined properties?

Furthermore there's a language-standard static type checker, mypy.

> pattern matching

We have that in Python 3.10.

> immutability-by-default for lists and dictionaries

We do have tuples and frozendict.

Arguably its implementations of functional features are much weaker than "truly" functional ones such as Lisp, Haskell, OCaML or F#.

[Can_Not]

> Python aborts almost immediately whenever it can

doesn't sound very strong

[moron4hire]

Runtime type checking is most definitely not what people mean when they talk about strong type systems.

[reikonomusha]

Strong != static.

[ewi_]

I love python, and I don't know if the GP are good points, but your answer is really disengenuous.

> > pattern matching

> We have that in Python 3.10.

> > immutability-by-default for lists and dictionaries

> We do have tuples and frozendict.

3.10 like the version that is not released yet?

Tuples an frozendicts, so precisely non default list and dicts?

[mypalmike]

The tools are there but you don't like their names.

[c-cube]

Neither tuples nor frozen dicts offer efficient (logarithmic or constant time) updates, like lists or balanced trees or HAMT do. You can't really write a program with only immutable structures in python, unless you accept it will be unbearably slow, even for python. Clojure, erlang, elixir, these are dynamically typed and functional.