The Zen of Python clearly states: There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it. I think that "obvious" is the key word here -- it

The Zen of Python clearly states: There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it. I think that "obvious" is the key word here -- it says nothing about the non-obvious ways, nor about which ones are better. The problem here is not with Python itself, but with people looking for a silver bullet which will solve all their problems. In Python, this is presently very obvious with async programming, and people insisting on using it for everything; however, async is useful for only a certain subset of problems one might encounter (and in a few cases it's incredibly useful) while in most situations it adds avoidable complexity. However, this approach is definitely not limited to Python, and every language has its own examples (classes vs prototypes in Javascript is one example). My advice is: use what you're comfortable with; don't be afraid of learning new techniques, but don't feel obligated to use them at all costs; ignore the Kool Kidz™ pushing fads.