> Those little 20-500 line scripts were just so much more fun in Python than anything else though
It's notable that you've written this in the past tense. These kinds of scripts don't seem to be a focus for Python any more.
In fact, I recently heard as justification for a new Python feature: "it helps us with our 100-million-line Python codebase". The language has become extremely complex as it prioritizes the needs of a few teams writing millions of lines over millions of developers each writing relatively few lines.
The reason is that the design team are all working on these large codebases and, understandably, mostly focused on what makes their own lives easier. I was hopeful that in the transition from a BDFL-based governance system to a Steering Council, we would see a larger variety of experience and opinions designing the language. Instead, I don't think there has ever been a single scientist, finance worker etc on the Steering Council - it's always software developers, almost always employees of large software companies.
I’m curious what about the language is getting more complex. Any examples? The ecosystem definitely seems to be getting much more complex, but the language itself hasn’t evolved dramatically since type hints that I can remember.
I've been as programmer for 60 years. I know perl well and it was my go-to scripting language for years although I hated the sigils various other design choices. Only within this year did I set aside the time to learn Python. It didn't take long ... the language is not complex. Of course the libraries and frameworks and deployment tools etc. are extensive and dense and complex because the world has become so complex, extraordinarily so compared to the world when I started programming.
> the language is not complex
It's easy to get started with, but it's certainly not simple. Even small expressions like `a + b` or `a.b` in Python have very complex semantics.
Gee, programming is hard.
The language is not complex.
(And there is a context here, with claims that the language has become complex ... your examples are obviously not relevant to that context.)
Type hints aren’t a single addition - with every release they get more complex. It wouldn’t surprise me if the language included 20+ typing-related PEPs by now.
The other obvious example of complexity is pattern matching. The feature is very complex, especially how it breaks established rules of the language. It also required fundamental changes to the interpreter to accommodate it: a rewrite of the parser from simple LL(1) to PEG.
> It also required fundamental changes to the interpreter to accommodate it: a rewrite of the parser from simple LL(1) to PEG.
The PEP 617[1] (the PEG change) doesn't mention pattern matching at all.
[1] https://peps.python.org/pep-0617
Guido said for many years (decades) that he wanted to get back to the parser.