I think I didn't hit reply-all. PICNIC moment :D
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tommy Pham [mailto:tommy...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 11:01 AM
> To: Adam Richardson
> Subject: Re: [PHP] A general discussion of libraries and frameworks
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Adam Richardson <simples...@gmail.com>
> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:07 AM, Tommy Pham <tommy...@gmail.com>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Adam Richardson [mailto:simples...@gmail.com]
> >> > Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 12:05 AM
> > ...
> >> > I use frameworks when there is a particular flow I wish to enforce
> >> > throughout the application. For instance, my web framework
> >> > enforces a general flow during all requests:
> >> Adam,
> >> I find that 'enforce' leads to inflexibility eventually.
> > You're absolutely right, choosing to use a framework does mean that
> > you give up some flexibility. The degree of flexibility you loose
> > seems to depend on how many areas of flow the framework tries to
> >> As for framework,
> >> I'm still looking for a good implementation of the presented concept
> >> (MVC, ORM, etc.). Case in point: MVC. You could just add or do some
> >> minor change in either/all the Model, View, or Controller, having
> >> that flexibility to adapt w/o major base code change is very nice.
> >> The problem lies therein of implementing the abstract concept MVC
> >> into concrete, workable (learning, understanding, maintaining, etc.),
> >> reliable, and flexible (modular, 3rd party add-ins, etc.) code while
> >> retaining good performance. IE: Zend Framework. The code base is
> >> somewhat bloated, IMO. But as others have mentioned, it's still
> >> useful due to its modular design as you can choose to use parts of it
> >> within your app and not need to implement the entire framework. I
> >> don't have enough experience with ZF yet to see how expandability it
> >> is in terms of third party add-in/plugin/module. Here's the list of
> >> PHP frameworks . I don't know how current it is. As you can see
> >> from that table, only 2 supports everything that's current under the
> >> sun, including template & event driven.
> > Nice points.
> > In terms of supporting everything, I rarely look to see how many
> > things a framework supports, I look at how well the framework supports
> > the flow-related aspects of my application I really need. I can
> > always use a library to fill in the holes if the framework's core
> > merits (usability, extensibility, etc.)
> The main reason why I look at the features of the framework simply that
> should my project is based upon it, even though I don't use all of the
> features, someone later may develop a plug-in to further enhance the
> quality of the project and like to use a feature from that same framework,
> that I didn't use.
> >> Yii isn't very mature from what I've
> >> read so far. PRADO's, although acronym is both catchy and
> >> meaningful, code base is too much ASP.NET like even though it's based
> >> on PHP >.>.
> >> Ironically, both projects are started by the same person.
> > Both are nice frameworks, with Yii being an exceptional point of interest.
> > Given your priorities, I'm curious if you've tried frameworks like
> > Code Igniter or the Fat Free Framework. Both are small enough that
> > they feel quite flexible.
> No, I haven't looked at those as I'm looking for something that will give me
> the following, or have the ability to accept the following plug-ins, for my
> project based on a concept I have:
> * MVC - excellent to model after the business
> * Multiple DB's - so my project can be used anywhere
> * ORM (optional and if it meets the points mentioned above)
> * DB Objects - allows flexibility within the app and the DB backend
> * Templates - for more flexible UI
> * Caching - the very last thing I'll implement upon/after project maturity.
> understand all of the benefits and shortcomings. Most of its usage I've seen
> so far is solve a problem that should never happen in the first place.)
> * Validation - what app would be w/o validation these days
> * Ajax - rich UI and performance
> * ACL - I'm not sure that Auth modules mentioned in the table would fully
> provide ACL
> * Event Driven - that saids it all.
> * SOAP
> Since some of the frameworks doesn't have most of the above features, I
> didn't look at those. I'll put some time to look into CodeIgniter, Cake, and
> yours later.
> > Also, there are frameworks that don't force an MVC-styled routing
> > mechanism on you. My web framework allows you to map dynamic
> > functionality onto existing website (legacy PHP code and all), whilst
> > providing the flow for any new added functionality.
> > Nice commentary, Tommy.
> > Adam
> > --
> > Nephtali: PHP web framework that functions beautifully
> > http://nephtaliproject.com
> Thanks. I need MVC simply for the fact that it will reduce my project's code
> base size. As for MVC styled framework, I think PureMVC is good so far
> although it lacks many of the features I'm looking for. It was created
> originally for Flash based but since been ported over to C#, ColdFusion,
> and natively supports modules while allowing both sync and async
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php