>Today, it seems that Python is pitched for almost everything, short of ethernet drivers. I think the "Python is pitched for almost everything" in that sentenc

>Today, it seems that Python is pitched for almost everything, short of ethernet drivers. I think the "Python is pitched for almost everything" in that sentence shows a misinterpretation of gp's phrasing of "use case". The "use case" isn't about different subject matter domains as if it was a claim about using Python as a universal language for writing database kernels or AAA games. Instead, the "use case" is about the 2-level 2-language architecture of (1) a high-level scripting language and (2) extension modules that can be written in low-level C and imported into the interpreter. That's the "glue language" + "C Language" to combine the strengths of each language approach. (In contrast, Julia took approach of designing a language that was "fast enough" to avoid the "2 languages issue".) >Where is this single use case intent articulated, by whom, and what year was it? What is the use case? The Python "ergonomics use case" (not "domains use case") was originated by Python's inventor Guido van Rossum from the beginning in 1991. A clone of the 1991 Python source code has Guido's commentary for importing C modules: https://github.com/smontanaro/python-0.9.1 https://github.com/smontanaro/python-0.9.1 Modern frameworks and libraries like TensorFlow and Pytorch continue the same use case of "high-level script glue code calling low-level C code" that was there in 1991. You can't write a tight cpu loop in pure Python code to paint a 60fps video game. That's not Python's intended use case. That philosophy is why a library like Tensorflow only has Python code for users to "glue" together the neural network graph which then calls out to the C++ code for the expensive cpu loops of backpropagation, gradient descent, etc.