Python's "only one way to do it" philosophy isn't good?

[Paul Rubin]

Douglas Alan <doug at alum.mit.edu> writes:
> But that's a library issue, not a language issue.  The technology
> exists completely within Lisp to accomplish these things, and most
> Lisp programmers even know how to do this, as application frameworks
> in Lisp often do this kind.  The problem is getting anything put into
> the standard.  Standardizing committees just suck.

Lisp is just moribund, is all.  Haskell has a standardizing committee
and yet there are lots of implementations taking the language in new
and interesting directions all the time.  The most useful extensions
become de facto standards and then they make it into the real
standard.