This is fair criticism. I've worked with Python for many years now, and one of the things that attracted me was that there was always a fsirly static "Pythonic"

This is fair criticism. I've worked with Python for many years now, and one of the things that attracted me was that there was always a fsirly static "Pythonic" way to do things. The language has now grown so much that 80% of the people only use 20% of the language, but not always the same 20%, making it difficult to read other people's code. And all the syntactic changes contribute to fragmentation (not every project can have its Python interpreter upgraded regularly). There's something to be said for a more stable, if less elegant, language.