It's not FUD if someone posts an opposing viewpoint. My point was that some of the terminology used in this community is rather disingenuous. Python has a lot of strengths, but let's also be honest about its weaknesses.
So far you haven’t had a good track record of making statements which are factually correct and detailed enough to discuss. If you want to contribute anything of value to the conversation try making a longer comment which explains in detail precisely what you believe is a problem and why it matters so much that you’re willing to accuse a popular open source community of making false claims.
So far I’ve seen one concrete example from you (the SQL/file path one) which is either the same in every other language (if you store them as generic strings) or prevented by Python’s type system (if you use non-generic types).
I posted a link by Professor Robert Harper, I guess you didn't read it. This has been a discussion about terminology, so I'm not sure you can claim anybody is factually incorrect.
That guess would be incorrect. I would suggest that you stop disparaging other people and try to clearly articulate the point you are trying to make in enough detail to be discussed.
As I said, the link I posted contains the detail. If you've read it then perhaps you'd care to comment on it instead of posting successive personal attacks. I suggest that you not take my opinions (or Harpers) so personally.
Let's be real, probably 99% of projects just use a language that the main developer is already familiar with. Social and economic realities often trump technical merit, which is why inferior technology has such inertia long past the time when better replacements are available.
And I think that's ok, because (imho) 90%-to-95% of the code written right now falls under the "trivial" label.