This article seems vacuous to me. It misses the point that tuples are fundamental to the language with c-speed native support for packing, unpacking, hashing, p

This article seems vacuous to me. It misses the point that tuples are fundamental to the language with c-speed native support for packing, unpacking, hashing, pickling, slicing and equality tests. Tuples appear everywhere from the output of doctest, to time tuples, the result of divmod, the output of a csv reader and the output of a sqlite3 query. Tuples are a core concept and fundamental data aggregation tool for Python. However, this post uses a trivial `Point()` class strawman to try to shoot down the idea of using tuples at all. IMO that is fighting the language and every existing API that either accepts tuple inputs or returns tuple outputs. That is a vast ecosystem. According the glossary a named tuple "any type or class that inherits from tuple and whose indexable elements are also accessible using named attributes." Presumably, no one disputes that having names improves readability. So really this weak post argues against tuples themselves.