For what it's worth, I've used Python professionally and in several classes. I certainly don't have much experience in it, but it would be odd if I did--why wou

For what it's worth, I've used Python professionally and in several classes. I certainly don't have much experience in it, but it would be odd if I did--why would I use a language I don't particularly like too much? You only say there are no horrible gotchas with tuples because you've never spent hours hunting down a bug and finding that you forgot a trailing comma. More pertinently, changing something like ("foo", "bar", "baz") to ("foo") actually breaks the code. This style is used often in configuration scripts (e.g. for Django) and certainly got me before. I don't really see what generator expressions have to do with anything. The performance problem isn't a problem per se--the performance just isn't good. But this does not mean it's bad! That was really the whole point of my post; the performance, like everything else about the language, is unimpressive. In my experience, even naively written Haskell tends to perform better while being shorter and easier to write. My point with Lambda the Ultimate was more general--I've noticed that the more programming language oriented a community is, the less people like Python. The people who spend the most time thinking about and working on different programming languages--the denizens of Lambda the Ultimate--are the ones who like it least. It's very much like music that musicians don't like. What I meant by lowest common denominator is that you could get virtually anybody, regardless of skill level, to use Python. C is far more tricky--and has far more odd edge cases and ways to shoot yourself in the foot--than Python. It trades this for lower-level hardware access and performance, but this makes it far less of a LCD language than Python. This is not a matter of "cool"--and it's not even a matter of Python being a bad tool. It's a matter of Python not being an outstanding, or, honestly, even a good tool. And, as I said, this is perfectly fine; there are plenty of reasons to choose a solid tool you know well over something that may even be strictly superior. I can even understand why people would like this; many people like something approachable and bland over something seemingly exotic but also exciting. But this does not fit with Python's general hype. People trot Python out as the gold standard of language design and are rather proud of themselves (as the post starting this whole discussion parodied) without having the substance to back that attitude up. And all this goes back to the original thesis: Python is not actively bad, but it is also not actively good--it occupies a rather uninteresting middle ground. This is only surprising in light of its somewhat incongruous reputation as one of the best languages in certain circles.