[PHP] Design question
Morning everyone! I have a design question... No it's not about the interior of my house... although I could use some help with that as well... I am working on a framework for my own use (And maybe one day will beat out the popular frameworks! Hey I can dream right? :)) and to increase my knowledge. Here's my current index page: DJ_doctype(HTML4S); DJ_head(Double J FrameWork, $cfgCss, $cfgMeta); DJ_modules(navigation, option); DJ_page(main_content.html, mainContent); DJ_dbconnect($cfgDatabase); DJ_footer(copywrite, Double J Web Design); It all works perfectly but I'm starting to question having a bunch of function calls like that or should I simply have a big master DJ_displayPage() call? or should I have my framework create the html files? Has anyone gone down this road before? any pitfalls I should watch out for that aren't in google yet? :) Thanks everyone! Jason Pruim -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Design question
On Sat, 2011-02-05 at 11:11 -0500, li...@pruimphotography.com wrote: Morning everyone! I have a design question... No it's not about the interior of my house... although I could use some help with that as well... I am working on a framework for my own use (And maybe one day will beat out the popular frameworks! Hey I can dream right? :)) and to increase my knowledge. Here's my current index page: DJ_doctype(HTML4S); DJ_head(Double J FrameWork, $cfgCss, $cfgMeta); DJ_modules(navigation, option); DJ_page(main_content.html, mainContent); DJ_dbconnect($cfgDatabase); DJ_footer(copywrite, Double J Web Design); It all works perfectly but I'm starting to question having a bunch of function calls like that or should I simply have a big master DJ_displayPage() call? or should I have my framework create the html files? Has anyone gone down this road before? any pitfalls I should watch out for that aren't in google yet? :) Thanks everyone! Jason Pruim I guess it all depends on what you need. A little while back there was a discussion on the list about whether or not to leave all content dynamic or have the PHP CMS create the various .html pages required. There are pros and cons to each method. As for the various calls vs a single call to display the page, that depends on how you will be using it. Personally, I'd prefer using one call to something like your call to DJ_displayPage() which itself can accept various parameters or an array of parameters that then makes the more individual calls to the other functions. Anything to reduce typing while still being maintainable is never a bad thing in my book, unless it becomes a crazy long list of chained calls! Thanks, Ash http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
Re: [PHP] Design question
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 11:11:57AM -0500, li...@pruimphotography.com wrote: Morning everyone! I have a design question... No it's not about the interior of my house... although I could use some help with that as well... I am working on a framework for my own use (And maybe one day will beat out the popular frameworks! Hey I can dream right? :)) and to increase my knowledge. Here's my current index page: DJ_doctype(HTML4S); DJ_head(Double J FrameWork, $cfgCss, $cfgMeta); DJ_modules(navigation, option); DJ_page(main_content.html, mainContent); DJ_dbconnect($cfgDatabase); DJ_footer(copywrite, Double J Web Design); Copywrite should be copyright in this context. It all works perfectly but I'm starting to question having a bunch of function calls like that or should I simply have a big master DJ_displayPage() call? Is this index page a front controller, or are there separate page controllers? If the calls are all *identical*, then you can stuff them into a single function call. The biggest problem with this is variable visibility. You'll have to monitor that and decide if it's worth it. In my case, I use page controllers where all the important variables are declared. If I put a render() function at the bottom, I'd have to pass in all those variables (on the stack) rather than simply have them visible to the template page that I include() at the bottom of the page controller. or should I have my framework create the html files? Has anyone gone down this road before? any pitfalls I should watch out for that aren't in google yet? :) Some of this depends on your overall application architecture, which is where the front contoller/page controller question above comes from. Paul -- Paul M. Foster http://noferblatz.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Design question
On Feb 5, 2011, at 11:19 AM, Ashley Sheridan wrote: On Sat, 2011-02-05 at 11:11 -0500, li...@pruimphotography.com wrote: Morning everyone! I have a design question... No it's not about the interior of my house... although I could use some help with that as well... I am working on a framework for my own use (And maybe one day will beat out the popular frameworks! Hey I can dream right? :)) and to increase my knowledge. Here's my current index page: DJ_doctype(HTML4S); DJ_head(Double J FrameWork, $cfgCss, $cfgMeta); DJ_modules(navigation, option); DJ_page(main_content.html, mainContent); DJ_dbconnect($cfgDatabase); DJ_footer(copywrite, Double J Web Design); It all works perfectly but I'm starting to question having a bunch of function calls like that or should I simply have a big master DJ_displayPage() call? or should I have my framework create the html files? Has anyone gone down this road before? any pitfalls I should watch out for that aren't in google yet? :) Thanks everyone! Jason Pruim I guess it all depends on what you need. A little while back there was a discussion on the list about whether or not to leave all content dynamic or have the PHP CMS create the various .html pages required. There are pros and cons to each method. I'll definitely be looking that thread up! I got a little behind in my reading and must have missed it. As for the various calls vs a single call to display the page, that depends on how you will be using it. Personally, I'd prefer using one call to something like your call to DJ_displayPage() which itself can accept various parameters or an array of parameters that then makes the more individual calls to the other functions. Anything to reduce typing while still being maintainable is never a bad thing in my book, unless it becomes a crazy long list of chained calls! That last sentence is the kicker... That's where it gets hard hehe. When is too much too much? And I am guessing that is a decision that only I as the programmer can make... At least until someone uses my framework and complains about it! :) Thanks Ash! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Design question
On Feb 5, 2011, at 6:46 PM, Paul M Foster wrote: On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 11:11:57AM -0500, li...@pruimphotography.com wrote: Morning everyone! I have a design question... No it's not about the interior of my house... although I could use some help with that as well... I am working on a framework for my own use (And maybe one day will beat out the popular frameworks! Hey I can dream right? :)) and to increase my knowledge. Here's my current index page: DJ_doctype(HTML4S); DJ_head(Double J FrameWork, $cfgCss, $cfgMeta); DJ_modules(navigation, option); DJ_page(main_content.html, mainContent); DJ_dbconnect($cfgDatabase); DJ_footer(copywrite, Double J Web Design); Copywrite should be copyright in this context. It all works perfectly but I'm starting to question having a bunch of function calls like that or should I simply have a big master DJ_displayPage() call? Is this index page a front controller, or are there separate page controllers? If the calls are all *identical*, then you can stuff them into a single function call. The biggest problem with this is variable visibility. You'll have to monitor that and decide if it's worth it. In my case, I use page controllers where all the important variables are declared. If I put a render() function at the bottom, I'd have to pass in all those variables (on the stack) rather than simply have them visible to the template page that I include() at the bottom of the page controller. Right now in my simple test pages the variables are very standard but I will keep an eye on it to see if I need to change to a different system. I'm leaning more towards doing a page controller. I've always liked the way that I can simplify the display of pages especially with regards to updates in the layout by just having a index page that controls the entire site. or should I have my framework create the html files? Has anyone gone down this road before? any pitfalls I should watch out for that aren't in google yet? :) Some of this depends on your overall application architecture, which is where the front contoller/page controller question above comes from. Thanks for the insight! I'll be keeping these points in mind in my work! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Design question.
Hi, I have a question. I been working a personal project that I am want to make a like simpler. I have several pages have in which I have place the information to connect to my database, whick is getting old. What I am wanting to do is create file like most do, a config, but I want to know which is better, config.php or config.inc. I know there not much different from what I have read but I am wanting to know which gives more protection. And what recommendation would you give on set it up? I am only asking because I am at some point wanting to release my project to public. Chuck Payne Magi Design and Support -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Design question.
Hi, I place name all my included files *.inc... I place them all in a folder /inc/ and place a .htaccess file in that directory to restrict the files being served of HTTP: Files ~ \.inc$ Order Allow,Deny Deny from all /Files Another option would be to place them in a folder ABOVE your web root, so that Apache can't serve them -- if you have that option. This does a few things for me: 1. I know that all *.php files are intended to be served direct to the user through a web browser, and I know that all .inc files are code fragments, not intended to be run out of context. 2. As long as Apache is configured properly, no one will see any passwords n stuff. Cheers, Justin on 22/09/02 11:55 AM, Chuck PUP Payne ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Hi, I have a question. I been working a personal project that I am want to make a like simpler. I have several pages have in which I have place the information to connect to my database, whick is getting old. What I am wanting to do is create file like most do, a config, but I want to know which is better, config.php or config.inc. I know there not much different from what I have read but I am wanting to know which gives more protection. And what recommendation would you give on set it up? I am only asking because I am at some point wanting to release my project to public. Chuck Payne Magi Design and Support -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Design question.
This explanation from Justin is worth saving. I also like to call all of my included modules *.inc, and I prefer to store them outside of document root. However, if you want to keep all of your files together, the .htaccess file shown below is the best way to restrict direct access to modules. Some people make the mistake of simply making *.inc files considered PHP by Apache (claiming it is better to execute them than to have their source code displayed), but this gives attackers the opportunity to execute your modules out of context - a very dangerous approach. One extra note worth adding is that you should add this configuration to your httpd.conf if you are the Web server administrator. This will keep you from having to remember the .htaccess file everywhere. Justin's method is best for when you do not have this option. Chris Justin French wrote: I place name all my included files *.inc... I place them all in a folder /inc/ and place a .htaccess file in that directory to restrict the files being served of HTTP: Files ~ \.inc$ Order Allow,Deny Deny from all /Files Another option would be to place them in a folder ABOVE your web root, so that Apache can't serve them -- if you have that option. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Design question.
Thanks guys. That really helpful. Chuck Payne On 9/21/02 10:16 PM, Chris Shiflett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This explanation from Justin is worth saving. I also like to call all of my included modules *.inc, and I prefer to store them outside of document root. However, if you want to keep all of your files together, the .htaccess file shown below is the best way to restrict direct access to modules. Some people make the mistake of simply making *.inc files considered PHP by Apache (claiming it is better to execute them than to have their source code displayed), but this gives attackers the opportunity to execute your modules out of context - a very dangerous approach. One extra note worth adding is that you should add this configuration to your httpd.conf if you are the Web server administrator. This will keep you from having to remember the .htaccess file everywhere. Justin's method is best for when you do not have this option. Chris Justin French wrote: I place name all my included files *.inc... I place them all in a folder /inc/ and place a .htaccess file in that directory to restrict the files being served of HTTP: Files ~ \.inc$ Order Allow,Deny Deny from all /Files Another option would be to place them in a folder ABOVE your web root, so that Apache can't serve them -- if you have that option. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Design question.
(Sorry if I've already sent this.) I agree. But, I don't really see any problem having *.inc files as *.inc.php (so that they'll be executed by Apache) esp. IF the config file have only this: (Even if this is executed nothing shows up...) ?php $my_super_user = 'blahblah'; $my_super_password = 'blahblahblah'; ? I just thought this is worth knowing esp. if there's no way you can use .htaccess. (Of course, if you can't use .htaccess, you might want to change ISPs or set up your own server but that is for a different topic :) - E This explanation from Justin is worth saving. I also like to call all of my included modules *.inc, and I prefer to store them outside of document root. However, if you want to keep all of your files together, the .htaccess file shown below is the best way to restrict direct access to modules. Some people make the mistake of simply making *.inc files considered PHP by Apache (claiming it is better to execute them than to have their source code displayed), but this gives attackers the opportunity to execute your modules out of context - a very dangerous approach. One extra note worth adding is that you should add this configuration to your httpd.conf if you are the Web server administrator. This will keep you from having to remember the .htaccess file everywhere. Justin's method is best for when you do not have this option. Chris Justin French wrote: I place name all my included files *.inc... I place them all in a folder /inc/ and place a .htaccess file in that directory to restrict the files being served of HTTP: Files ~ \.inc$ Order Allow,Deny Deny from all /Files Another option would be to place them in a folder ABOVE your web root, so that Apache can't serve them -- if you have that option. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
