I thought the article was good. It started with a basic premise, "Should we ditch Python and other languages in favor of Julia for technical computing?" Then the article shows several methods for speeding up python code to be faster than using julia. I was a little disappointed that pypy was not mentioned, but it is a good introduction to speeding up python code.

I think the flaw in the article is when it switches to answering, "did the Julia team [write] Python benchmarks the best way for Python?" Then it rewrites the fib implementation to use a cache, which makes the comparison to the julia version completely ridiculous. It also does all sorts of optimization which clearly deviated from the spirit of the benchmark, naive python vs naive julia.

I wish the conclusion had been written in a way that clearly answered the original premise, should we ditch python for julia? The article clearly showed that there are a lot of good ways to speed up python code. Looking for algorithmic complexity wins (like in the fib example), using cpython, using numba, and profiling all can be used to speed up python code to the level of naive julia code. Which leads to the conclusion, if all you want is faster code there is no need to ditch python for julia.