That blog post is based on a silent assumption that software development cost is somehow lower for Python than for other "faster" languages. This is not what I

That blog post is based on a silent assumption that software development cost is somehow lower for Python than for other "faster" languages. This is not what I observe in practice. I was not more productive in Python than I was in Rust, despite having similar amount of experience in both. Python is optimized for easy learning, but not for actual productivity and long term maintenance. Lack of static type system makes it hard to safely refactor code and forces one to write crazy amount of tests for even trivial things. Keeping 100% coverage in a huge project is simply expensive and impractical. And even with a high number of tests you'll be running in stupid errors of "who put a None in that field?" kind occasionally and that could be a larger slowdown than Rust lifetime checker complaints ;) I think Python could be a win only if you already have a library that solves your problem available only in Python and you're just gluing things together (so just a better bash) or if you target extremely low/cheap-end of quality (hiring undergrads, being ok with crashes on prod, etc).