[rglullis]

It absolutely does.

- Typing annotations + mypy can completely help you build and understand a complex system. WIth pyright you can even analyze code that is not annotated. The tooling that enables developers to design and conceptualize their application around the type abstraction is there. You make it sound like people can write`x = "2" + 20` in python like in Javascript or PHP4.

- Concurrency: take your pick of multithreading, multiprocessing or asyncio. The abstraction of a thread model is there. The abstraction for an event loop is there. Would it be nice to have something like the Actor model as well? Sure, but to go from that to "python does not have it" is a completely wild take.

- "No actual private methods or classes": I mean, really? Obviously classes are supported. You can create different classes by composition, you can create a hierachical structure. You can use Protocol to define types that must implement interfaces. You can define functions that are overloaded and you can have method dispatching. All of these ABSTRACTIONS are provided. It's not because they are not forced on you that they don't exist.

[simonask]

Not the person you replied to, but I think the point is that it isn’t really that interesting to point out that you can achieve certain things in Python with enough diligence.

Practical experience shows that languages that force some strictness about things that are known to be sources of trouble as complexity grows unsurprisingly make it easier to manage those sources of complexity.

It is vastly easier to write a performant, multithreaded program in Rust than it is in Python. That doesn’t mean it is easier to write all programs in Rust than in Python - it isn’t.

[rglullis]

There might be an argument to be made here, but this is a completely different argument than saying "python code is only readable locally" and "Python does not provide the abstractions to build and understand complex applications".

[arwineap]

As far as I know python type annotations are not enforced at runtime, these are really just helpers or extensions to your local dev environment

It's interesting to me that Python requires third party tooling (mypy) but we are still giving credit to Python that it has all the tools it needs

Yes, complex systems have been built in Python but that's despite it's tooling not because of it

Our python applications are all mypy, and we have been experimenting with the uv solution as well. I'm glad that Python has type annotations and classes but it sure doesn't feel the same as a statically typed language

[rglullis]

> As far as I know python type annotations are not enforced at runtime, these are really just helpers or extensions to your local dev environment

But it is still a feature of the language. Try running a type-annotated python module on a python 3.4 interpreter, it won't work.

> but it sure doesn't feel the same as a statically typed language.

Again, that is totally a defensible position but an entirely different argument than the ridiculous "Python is only locally readable and does not have the abstractions to help understand large scale applications" line.

I am not here to make a case that Python is the ultimate language and that it is without flaws. Quite the opposite. I am porting some of my FOSS projects to typescript and Rust because I ultimately agree with the premise from the article. The only reason I am here in this stupid discussion is because it's 2026 and we still have some pretentious know-it-alls who think that Python is just some "scripting language" which can not be used for serious work.