Much as I would have preferred Swift to have been "Objective-C the good parts", my reasons for wanting that are totally unrelated to the idea pushed in the blog

Much as I would have preferred Swift to have been "Objective-C the good parts", my reasons for wanting that are totally unrelated to the idea pushed in the blog post. Python isn't any more expressive than a language like C# once you remove the Java-inspired cruft. C# lets you go all the way down to the metal with pointers and what not if need be and supports fully dynamic types with "dynamic" and the underlying "Dynamic Language Runtime", but at no point does it feel like two separate languages glued together the same way Objective-C did, or now Mojo. People have written a Nintendo Switch emulator in C# ffs. Python's higher productivity is entirely thanks to its libraries (including the standard library). The dynamism isn't really key to it, heck, @dataclasses expect you to annotate the field types even though they aren't used because of a syntax quirk! Mojo is based around Python to piggyback on Python's ecosystem the same way Objective-C and C++ piggybacked on C. It has nothing to do with a "scripting" language vs a "component" language. Lua has a much nicer interface for scripting C than Python does, not requiring manual reference counting for one, to the point the original Torch (before it became PyTorch) used it. It didn't matter in the face of Python's ecosystem.