"Stut" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Tony Marston wrote: >> "Stut" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Tony Marston wrote: >>>> ""Jay Blanchard"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >>>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> [snip] >>>>> If you don't use a framework then obviously you are writing nothing >>>>> but >>>>> mickey mouse programs, and wouldn't stand a chance when it comes to >>>>> writing a proper application. >>>>> ......If you think you can achieve the same >>>>> level of productivity WITHOUT a framework then you are living in cloud >>>>> \cuckoo land. >>>>> \[/snip] >>>>> >>>>> Tony is obviously joking here folks. >>>> No I'm not. >>> Shocking and unexpected opinion from the developer of a framework. NOT! >>> >>> Anyway, I can see this falling into another lengthy discussion so I'll >>> get my contribution in early to avoid disappointment. >>> >>> As others have mentioned this question is plagued by semantic arguments. >>> To me a framework is as much about the way requests are routed and >>> handled as it is about utility code. >>> >>> I don't use what I would call a framework, but I do have a >>> well-established file layout for my sites and an extensive library of >>> code that covers everything I need to do regularly. >> >> This could be classed as a framework as it obviously provides the means >> to make use of all that code which has already been written and therefore >> does not (or should not) need to be written again and again. As well as >> providing a few low-level routines a fully fledged framework will also >> provide a series of high-level functions such as user authentication, >> role based access control, dynamic menus, audit logging and perhaps a >> workflow system. > > Not to me, that would be a code library. A framework is something that > would tie it all together and in doing so would introduce certain rules > and restrictions.
That's exactly what my framework does. It gives immediate access to a great deal of standard functionality without having to reinvent the wheel. >> The real measure of a good framework is the length of time it takes to >> create a new database table, then write the components to maintain the >> contents of that table. I can do this in 5 minutes without having to >> write a single line of PHP, HTML or SQL. If you can't match this then >> you're not in the same league. > > If that's your attitude I'm very happy to be in a different league. I tend > not to measure my productivity by how quickly I can develop functionality, > but rather on how well it runs, scales and how user-friendly it is. I'm > yet to meet a "framework" that satisfies those requirements. I tend to write applications which only expect to have a low number of users and where the speed of development, and hence the cost, is the most important issue. > This is a personal preference and your arrogance has definitely put me off > ever going near your code whether it be a framework or a hello world. You > are not better than me just because you use something you call a > framework, and the fact that you think you are has given me my biggest > chuckle of the day, so thanks for that. > > -Stut Glad to be of service. Don't applaud, just throw money. -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
