A lot of people seem to be confused by his Turing completeness argument. I think it's misleading and the phrase 'Turing complete' is a red herring. My guess i

A lot of people seem to be confused by his Turing completeness argument. I think it's misleading and the phrase 'Turing complete' is a red herring. My guess is that what he was getting at was that other languages use 'compiler-mode' switches for compatibility-breaking upgrades so that you can use older code with newer code. For example, you can write a program in the latest dialect of Free Pascal that includes a unit written in a 30 year old Turbo Pascal dialect and another unit written in a late-90s Delphi dialect. Even Javascript has `"use strict";` and PHP has `declare(strict_types=1);`. Python's solution was instead to say "Just go rewrite all the code you've ever written." That said, claiming that the language isn't Turing complete because it doesn't include switches for compatibility is a bit of a stretch.