Are you suggesting that python is more complex to use than x86_64 assembler?

Similarly, when I removed code from tornado to make it work with twisted, I neither tornado more complicated to use, nor did I introduce any limitations.

The "too complicated for many uses" thing kind of bugs me, though. It's the same argument people use to use for postgres vs. mysql. Something along the lines of "it has features I don't need" (where need probably means "understand" or "need today").

That's where tornado left me. What you call complication, I call features. I use some of these features.

For example, I'd be interested in knowing how something like my tdf web server could be written in tornado. It attaches processes to resource paths, captures and transforms the output from these processes (in a stream) and streams replicates of that data to whatever connections come in.

The answer, of course, involves reimplementing reactor.spawnProcess on top of ioloop. Then you find some of the subtleties contained therein. Then you begin to understand why it seemed complicated to begin with.

No, but twisted is much more complicated than regular python. The inversion of control and the fact that until quite recently it was almost impossible to write code for using the framework that was easy to read/understand by experienced python ciders who were not familiar with the idims and conventions used by the project. Twisted generates more WTFs per minute than any other bit of python kit. Some of this is due to a tradition of poor documentation within the project and some due to the nature of the code. Twisted is a complicated system, and sometimes this complexity is not worth embracing.