> but to go around claiming that it is a panacea for all things poorly planned is pure unadulterated stupidity. The article never claimed this: > "First, Pyth

> but to go around claiming that it is a panacea for all things poorly planned is pure unadulterated stupidity. The article never claimed this: > "First, Python uses loose typing, which was great for a small team rapidly developing new ideas and putting them into production –but less great for an enterprise-scale application that some customers were paying millions of dollars for," he writes. There are tradeoffs with both static and dynamic typing. Know the tradeoffs, know your business, then make the right decision for your use cases.