How Has Python Stayed Relevant for Decades?

I’ve been actively writing Python code since version 1.4 in the late 1990s. I’m a “fellow” on the Python Software Foundation and have been a contributor to and creator of many open-source Python projects over the years.

It’s remarkable to me how relevant Python continues to be after all this time. How in the world has Python cemented itself as not only a reliable platform but also a modern one, despite its age? 

It comes down to “The Zen.”

What is “The Zen”?

Fun fact. If you open up a Python interpreter and enter “import this,” you will be presented with a poem. Seriously. Go give it a shot. If you do, this is what you will see:

The Zen of Python, by Tim Peters

Beautiful is better than ugly.

Explicit is better than implicit.

Simple is better than complex.

Complex is better than complicated.

Flat is better than nested.

Sparse is better than dense.

Readability counts.

Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.

Although practicality beats purity.

Errors should never pass silently.

Unless explicitly silenced.

In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.

There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.

Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch.

Now is better than never.

Although never is often better than *right* now.

If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.

If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea.

Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!

Tim Peters has been an instrumental contributor to the Python community for many years. In 1999, Peters wrote The Zen of Python, sharing it with the Python mailing list. Before long, it was blessed by Guido van Rossum, Python’s creator, and found its way into Python itself in the form of the “import this” Easter egg.

The Zen is great, not just because it’s a cute Easter egg, but because it captures the essence, style, and guiding principles for the language. It is regularly referenced in code reviews and community forums, and even in official Python Enhancement Proposals (PEPs) decades later, and it still resonates as a blueprint to define what is “Pythonic.”

It’s fair to ask at this stage of the newsletter why the heck I’m rambling on about what may be the nerdiest poetry in history. Is The Zen relevant to you? What can we learn from it?

What can “The Zen” teach us?

The Zen is an example of how culture drives behavior, especially on technology teams. 

Since 1999, Python developers have been iterating on and improving the language, and while it has evolved considerably since the 1990’s, the language has maintained its core identity and spirit. 

There is no question that the Python of today is the logical consequence of decades of iteration within the boundaries of the Zen.

Applying The Zen to How We Build Teams and Systems

Last week, I had the pleasure of presenting at a CDW Leadership Technology Conference in Austin, Texas. The event brought together seasoned, experienced technology leaders from the CDW customer base to explore a variety of timely and relevant topics. 

I certainly enjoyed presenting, but another presenter managed to tickle my brain.

The presentation in question was from Roger Haney, one of CDW’s Chief Architects, and an all-around smart dude. Roger gave an in-depth overview of “platform engineering,” which is a discipline focused on enabling software teams to move quickly, with self-service workflows and tooling, all while maintaining adherence to a consistent, opinionated set of constraints. 

What The Zen has done for Python, platform engineering can do for software teams, providing a shared set of technologies, design patterns, and constraints that enable rapid innovation in a well-considered sandbox.

If you’d like to learn more about platform engineering, let me know! 

I’m also interested in hearing your reaction to The Zen. What is your favorite line? What are your thoughts on what we can learn from it?