Yep, I'm with you.

Maybe I'm the type of guy who shouldn't even be doing this. But I need to do
some simple projects. I can mug my way through a couple PHP scripts, but as
to writing anything from scratch? Nope. I won't get too far unless I have
PHP.net open in the next window.

I'm all for rapid development. So, Cake it is.

On 7/16/07, Christopher E. Franklin, Sr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> In my experiences, I don't have a formal education in PHP or any of
> that junk but, I know enough to be dangerous.  Since I do have a job
> as a web developer, when I was asked to re-write the entire site, I
> sat down for about 5 days reading the different documentations an
> manuals.  What I walked away with is almost exactly what was being
> stated above.
>
> Symphony is very complicated to understand.  For the casual PHP
> person, this is NOT the framework for you.  Trust me, I read the
> ENTIRE manual and walked away more confused than when I started
> reading it.
>
> On the other hand, I read the entire Cake manual and was almost
> instantly won over.  It was very easy for me to understand.
>
> CI... I tried this after I had started using cake.  I can't really say
> too much about it in the way of how easy it is to progress using this
> framework.  It is extremely similar to cake. (Or vice-versa, whichever
> way you want to look at it).
>
> If you are a developer for a company and you have more than two
> programmers, you should just get a copy of each manual, read it from
> end to end and see which is more appealing for everyone.  Otherwise,
> don't chose Symphony if you are an average user just because "it looks
> complicated, so I want a challenge".  Go with Cake or Code Igniter.
>
> There are some dislikes about cake that I will mention here.  When I
> read the manual, 1.1 was it. As I started plugging along at code, I
> realized that, I was going to be making more than just one site.  My
> big gripe was the plugins.  I wanted them to be modular so I can "plug
> it into" any site that I created.  My example was that I was going to
> have the same user type functions throughout each site.  Why not have
> a plug in?  I tired to do this entirely avoiding controllers or
> anything outside of the plugin directory but, in the end, it "barely"
> worked.  The reason being is, why should I make a user controller for
> 3 different sites, copy it to all 3, then when I have to make a
> change, re-copy it to all 3 and hope it works out alright.  That is
> not the way it should be done, you are going to run into problems.
>
> Obviously, the other gripe was documentation but, these groups and the
> IRC channel MORE than make up for that.  There is always a
> knowledgeable person on hand to lend you some advice.  Although, you
> may have to wait a bit, your question will get answered.
>
> On the plus side, 1.2 includes a "testing suite".  That way, referring
> back to the user plug in, if I have to make 3 user controllers,
> models, views, etc. I can have a set of tests specifically for each
> site to make sure I get what I want before I bring it live.  If I make
> a change to the table, did I forget something?  This is at least
> better than, "I hope this works!" and upload it.
>
> Now remember, this is a point of view from a run of the mill guy who
> started doing PHP as a hobby.  If I missed something, sorry.  But,
> like I said, unless you have at least 6months to 1year of development
> time ahead of you, do not chose Symphony, the learning curve is too
> great if you have to do a site in even 2 months.  Ci and Cake are
> basically the same, try cake first, then Ci.  If you have a lot of
> free time to learn, include Symphony in your evaluation.
>
> On Jul 16, 7:56 am, housebolt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Look at it this way,
> >
> > Cake keeps its structure simple and completely php-based so you don't
> > have to use the command line if you don't want to, which symfony has
> > you doing all of the time. The only time I use the command line is at
> > the beginning of a project, and that's using the bake.php script. But
> > the cool thing is I don't HAVE to use bake.php. Also, who wants to use
> > yaml in their php applications?? No one would use them in a normal php
> > application (unless you're crazy), so why use it now? With cake you're
> > up and running in about a half hour. I tried getting symfony up and
> > running and after 4 hours I gave up.
> >
> > The other reason is speed. While codeigniter is faster than cake (not
> > by much), it's not as mature or as cool to use, and symfony's so
> > complicated that it's about 5-10 times slower than cake.
> >
> > So there's my two bits. I tried symfony awhile back in my pre-
> > framework days and I almost lost my head trying to wrap it around
> > symfony. Go with cake, it's your best choice.
> >
> > On Jul 16, 4:19 am, Thierry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > to all php fans
> > > maybe an evil word over here,
> > > why aren't you using symfony
> >
> > > (i am and im hoping im not making the wrong choice, given that you
> > > have 6 times as many people which have joined this group...)
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cake 
PHP" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to