Long gone are the days of "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it" from PEP 20 ("Python Zen") and it's a pity IMO.
On one one hand: yay types. On the other hand… yeah, this isn’t Python anymore. What used to be a fairly simple language with some well known quirks evolved into an ungrokable katamari of every single possible language feature, a duct taped mush of pieces from different puzzle sets.
I guess it’s a victim of its own success. I just wish it stayed good old, Python, and people would just use different languages for different needs instead of needing one general purpose language for everything.
@decorator some_func
is simply
some_func = decorator(some_func)
There is no C++style "Here is 100 more arcane rules and 1000 exceptions and meta-rules that govern their interaction and application". It's all consistent additions to the language that does nothing but abstract out what you could do by hand but more verbose-ly and error-prone-ly. In fact, nothing in the above comments except type annotations are "language features" at all, they are libraries, and not even implicitly imported at that.