Again, Python et al have not evolved. They have continued to be modified and refined by the deliberate application of thought, particularly the kind of insightful, discursive thought that programming language design calls for.
The point is, Python wasn't (and perhaps isn't) perfect. Mistakes were made. Fixes introduced. PHP continues to be modified and refined as well. PHP developers are hard working developers with a difficult job; I can't help but think you're being insulting to them.
The difference is that at each stage, Python's designers have exercised more global reasoning than PHP's.
The PHP bar for inclusion, for most of its life, seems to have been "it compiles".
I don't think it's possible to directly compare PHP and Python and not draw the conclusion that PHP was basically slapped together out of any old thing that came to hand without any degree of planning or foresight.
The problem is that many early design decisions were made when PHP was a small personal project with the goal of accomplishing something immediately. It wasn't intended to be object-oriented. But that was a long time ago. Many of the points made about PHP design are ancient decisions and difficult to change because of backwards compatibility.
I'd say it's entirely unfair and incorrect to say the bar for inclusion has been "it compiles". Even some of the decisions made for PHP4, which I disagreed with, were debated endlessly.
Take, for example, the introduction of namespaces into PHP -- it got a lot of flack for using an additional character but if you study the design carefully it's nearly impossible for it work any other way in PHP. You might look at that and say there was no planning or foresight (or that it was simply the easiest solution) but that betrays the truth.
