On 4/30/07, Cristian Bichis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
- for complex sites developer needs to adapt ZF to a more complex format instead just doing his job
I'm going to get a bit abstract here, so bear with me. When you use a framework, there is a cost associated with that. The cost is usually "you have to do things the way I'm expecting them". If a developer prefers to fight the framework instead of working with the rules it has laid out, then there will obviously be problems. I would classify what you are doing as "fighting against the framework" because you are clearly trying to do something that the framework does not support given the architecture you have chosen for your application. The big question is this: how many OTHER people need what you say you need or is what you are trying to do a big edge case? I'm a firm believer that in 99.999% of all cases a problem fitting an application to a framework is due to the architecture of the application, not the framework. This is the point where egos get bruised because people want to blame tools, not themselves. I am guilty of this just as much as the next guy and now work very hard to build an application with the framework I am using in mind. Nothing makes code "smell" like having to rewrite core functionality of a framework that appears to be serving a large number of people with no problems. Maybe they just don't speak up like I do. :) I'd love to be proven wrong so I don't feel so strongly about it despite my own personal experiences. -- Chris Hartjes My motto for 2007: "Just build it, damnit!" @TheBallpark - http://www.littlehart.net/attheballpark @TheKeyboard - http://www.littlehart.net/atthekeyboard
