I guess what I'm trying to say is that Python is fine as it is; I believe (relatively) recent additions such type annotations and chasing trends like async only

I guess what I'm trying to say is that Python is fine as it is; I believe (relatively) recent additions such type annotations and chasing trends like async only serve to question Python's core strength. I know full well that Python is used a lot for "scripting" tasks (such as in yum/dnf and countless others), and has apparently a good standing in ML; in fact I'm using it daily (for example, I'm using BackInTime for backup). But whenever I come across eg. Python bindings in a package I want to compile, or Python used as part of a build step, I know I'm in for extra work since rarely does it work out of the box (relying on fragile "/usr/bin/env python" hashbangs, or having me to manoever around missing Python packages or versions, etc.). Saying this from the perspective of someone who has seen shell alternatives come and go, even Perl has, in practice, better backward-compat and has generally aged better. But yeah, it's offtopic I guess.