Is it happening because of Python getting more popular or getting more complicated to use?
However, Python does provide more tools to do more complicated things (async, type hints, etc), but that's not what most people use. They actually don't even know about it, and don't have to care. So it's not the questions you see on SO.
Python has gotten much, MUCH more popular, and we are currently facing a wave of new beginners. Particularly from schools (it's now the default teaching language in most countries) and from loads of workers that can benefit from manipulating data with programming and are attracted to Python for this.
It is precisely because Python is still easy that it's that popular: it doesn't benefit from massive existing code bases like Java or accidental monopoly like JS. We just have a lot of people creating a lot of libs for pretty much everything, because everybody can do it.
I also think the aesthetic of the language plays a big role. Python has been designed to allow you to dev with it with just MS notepad if you have to. It means you don't need to learn about a gigantic and complicated ecosystem to be productive with it (although it does exist): it's a huge help for all those people that are just getting started or not a programmer at heart. It's also harder to create very ugly code because you don't know what you are doing, and if you do, the result will not be as bad as with other languages because Guido made sure of it.
It's also why you don't get multi-line lambdas. Everything is a compromise.
That is one thing about Python that has always been interesting. For new programmers, it's such an attractive language because it's very simple to get up to speed and pump out usable code.
But to really start leveraging Python for more serious projects it's extremely useful to use Classes. And that's actually an appreciable bump in difficulty for inexperienced devs. I've seen go to great lengths to avoid it.
Maybe named structs would be a simpler way for them to level up complexity, especially if they're coming from a C background.
We can't expect them to known about dataclasses yet.
Arguably too much of a compromise. This is just Guido doing a "because I say so" and imposing his bias against functional programming. Give me a properly-designed language like Ruby any day over Python's bag of compromises.
So somehow, languages promoting big chunks of anonymous code never win never win the public heart.
In fact, when you are force by an accidental monopoly to use ine, you get js. What do people do in JS ? Multline lambda are mapped to property names or replaced with await. Registries are used in every framework. We spent 2 decades fixing JS to use as little callback hell as possible.
> setting up a new documentation is very easy with Sphinx
As per my original comment, the idea that documentation should require some kind of external markdown static site generator is bizarro land.
Sphinx starts from the point of view that you're going to write your documentation as if you were writing a book, then on top of that it has some optional features for pulling in information from source files.
Most of the others start from the view that you're autogenerating documentation from source-code comments, and on top of that there are some optional features for pulling in some extra content from documentation-specific files.
I think the Sphinx way tends to produce better documentation in the long run, but it takes more effort to get to something just-about-adequate.
Such as?
But back then, it was an insider's language, my teachers didn't know it existed. Then, year after year, I saw it become more and more popular.
But it is still so easy to use. Nowadays, I use it to teach programming to teenagers, and in less than a week I can teach them pretty cool and complex stuff (UCB algorithm, markov chains, simulated annealing, traveling salesman problem) because the language is so easy it does not get in their way.