On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Jason Norwood-Young
> haliphax wrote:
>> Perhaps I should have phrased it a bit more concise: This has been
>> discussed many times--often, and RECENTLY. Anyway, since I'm already
>> writing this, I'll say that overhead/bloat vs. productivity of the
>> developer is a trade-off you're going to have to make for ANY of the
>> frameworks out there.
> I disagree somewhat. A good framework should actually reduce bloat. It
> encourages you to implement proper MVC architecture, helps you avoid those
> rambling "function.php" files, and if it's well built, things like DB
> connectivity should already be optimised. I like CI because it does all of
> that fairly well, and tends to perform faster than something some coder
> (like myself) hacked together in the smallest time-frame possible. I use it
> on some pretty big sites - one with DB's with 10's of millions of records,
> and one site with over 1.5 million users a month. Personal thumbs up for CI,
> but use whatever suits your skill level, timeframe and requirements. Some
> frameworks will increase bloat, but sometimes that's worth it to get the
> project out the door in a given timeframe. If you're doing a blog on caring
> for chickens, throw it up in an hour with WordPress. If you're planning on
> being the next NY Times, WordPress will not be a kind mistress.
> There are down sides to CI too, but it suits my needs for the types of sites
> I produce.
Framework = Overhead (when compared to vanilla PHP). Period. I'm not
saying it's overhead that will cripple your application, or that
frameworks should be avoided... quite the contrary, in fact. I have
recently fallen in love with CodeIgniter myself--I'm just saying that
one should be at least respectfully aware of the overhead that comes
hand-in-hand with a(ny) framework, and weigh those against what you
feel is acceptable for your purpose.
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php