Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Hello guys, It seems most of you very tallended programmers. Could you generate someting like php-- withouth OO just namespaces ? and make 95% of php programmers very happy... this Object Orgy going to blow that language which makes us productive programmers. and My vote goes to Tony... Regards...
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Stuart wrote: Also, PHP is procedural with OO capabilities due to its history never understood this comment more - wish I'd given it more thought when it stuck out the first time. - cheers stut time4work! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Sun, 2009-01-18 at 18:10 +, Nathan Rixham wrote: Jochem Maas wrote: Per Jessen schreef: Nathan Rixham wrote: Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: You can't have your cake and eat it. You can't/shouldn't have strong and loose typing in the same language. In my opinion. Instead of providing programmers with a black or white choice between static or dynamic typing, we should instead strive for softer type systems. That is, static typing where possible, dynamic typing when needed. Unfortunately there is a discontinuity between contemporary statically typed and dynamically typed languages as well as a huge technical and cultural gap between the respective language communities. I'm not sure whether to take you seriously now - you're quoting from a Microsoft research paper? :-) lol well picked up - for all I'm a linux fan M$ aren't all bad and hell they must have some very good programmers in the various teams, seems a shame to invalidate thier hard work and research just because they work for satan. Completely agree, I just thought I'd score an easy point ... +1 to you both :-) omfg positivety returns to the list :-D cheers guys! BoooOOO! If it doesn't degrade again soon, I tossing my popcorn and going outside to play! :) Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Per Jessen p...@computer.org wrote: I think that's at best an example of someone having chosen the wrong tool. I can easily appreciate the frustration. My own rule-of-thumb - scripts are for small things and rapid prototyping. Once when a script (regardless of language) grows towards 1000 lines, start thinking about writing it in C (or whatever else is appropriate). I know of too many situations where thousands of lines of script code have turned into maintenance nightmares. Sorry to deviate from the thread, but I wanted to talk about this point for a second. Are you serious? Do you write php extensions for every app and have tons of them on your server? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Eric Butera wrote: On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Per Jessen p...@computer.org wrote: I think that's at best an example of someone having chosen the wrong tool. I can easily appreciate the frustration. My own rule-of-thumb - scripts are for small things and rapid prototyping. Once when a script (regardless of language) grows towards 1000 lines, start thinking about writing it in C (or whatever else is appropriate). I know of too many situations where thousands of lines of script code have turned into maintenance nightmares. Sorry to deviate from the thread, but I wanted to talk about this point for a second. Are you serious? Do you write php extensions for every app and have tons of them on your server? Yes, I am serious, and no, I don't write php extensions etc. I don't write many web apps anyway. I do use PHP quite a bit for command line stuff, in fact for 95% of my scripts. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 12:36, Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk wrote: Really? In 2007 I single-handedly designed and built an ERP system with 130 database tables, 230 relationships and 1000 screens, all with PHP and without an ORM and static typing. This took me 6 months. If you can't equal that then either you are not much of a programmer, or your development style is not as good as you think it is. And yet, just a few months ago, you couldn't figure out how to launch a background process from PHP[1]. Lesson: Alzheimer's is a bitch. If you want a good ORM then write one yourself, or is that beyond your capabilities? Personally I wouldn't touch an ORM with a barge pole. I develop applications using the 3 Tier Architecture (no, it's not the same as MVC) with a Data Access layer that I can easily switch between MySQL, PostgreSQL and Oracle. If I can do it then why can't you? The pattern I note here is, I have been the best programmer since 1977, and the standard of 'Good v. Bad' must be judged by me. In your section My career history - disasters I have encountered[2], you list three projects that didn't go as expected. That's a great ratio, considering the level of success you've probably had in counter. I'd admit at least a dozen projects over the years that ended in failure or less-than-successfully. The issue I see is that, in the three examples, your summary of what led to the failure was the fault of others. Question: Why hath they forsaken Thee, Lord?!? If you spend a year writing useless code, then it's your fault, not PHPs. It's a bad workman who blames his tools. For this statement, I completely agree. I'm not entirely sure where I see blame being placed on the language, but perhaps I've missed something. What I do see is that PHP is an adaptable language, intended to be molded, customized, and extended for each individual scenario. While changing the language in its core and releasing that as the official package will affect thousands of developers and countless lines of code, it is irresponsible and counterproductive to tell someone that they can not garner the opinions of others who would be interested to join in a project, outside of the core, to effect those changes; worse still to belittle someone in public. As the saying goes, 'tis better to keep one's mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. In writing, this is even truer. Observation: It is a bad workman who blames his tools, but it is a feeble-minded workman who shits where he eats: one who wastes billions of processor cycles to insult someone's intelligence in the same forum in which he announces his own framework. KEY: 1: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.php.general/190836/match= 2: http://www.tonymarston.net/aboutme/disasters.html -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote: On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 12:36, Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk wrote: Really? In 2007 I single-handedly designed and built an ERP system with 130 database tables, 230 relationships and 1000 screens, all with PHP and without an ORM and static typing. This took me 6 months. If you can't equal that then either you are not much of a programmer, or your development style is not as good as you think it is. And yet, just a few months ago, you couldn't figure out how to launch a background process from PHP[1]. Lesson: Alzheimer's is a bitch. If you want a good ORM then write one yourself, or is that beyond your capabilities? Personally I wouldn't touch an ORM with a barge pole. I develop applications using the 3 Tier Architecture (no, it's not the same as MVC) with a Data Access layer that I can easily switch between MySQL, PostgreSQL and Oracle. If I can do it then why can't you? The pattern I note here is, I have been the best programmer since 1977, and the standard of 'Good v. Bad' must be judged by me. In your section My career history - disasters I have encountered[2], you list three projects that didn't go as expected. That's a great ratio, considering the level of success you've probably had in counter. I'd admit at least a dozen projects over the years that ended in failure or less-than-successfully. The issue I see is that, in the three examples, your summary of what led to the failure was the fault of others. Question: Why hath they forsaken Thee, Lord?!? If you spend a year writing useless code, then it's your fault, not PHPs. It's a bad workman who blames his tools. For this statement, I completely agree. I'm not entirely sure where I see blame being placed on the language, but perhaps I've missed something. What I do see is that PHP is an adaptable language, intended to be molded, customized, and extended for each individual scenario. While changing the language in its core and releasing that as the official package will affect thousands of developers and countless lines of code, it is irresponsible and counterproductive to tell someone that they can not garner the opinions of others who would be interested to join in a project, outside of the core, to effect those changes; worse still to belittle someone in public. As the saying goes, 'tis better to keep one's mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. In writing, this is even truer. Observation: It is a bad workman who blames his tools, but it is a feeble-minded workman who shits where he eats: one who wastes billions of processor cycles to insult someone's intelligence in the same forum in which he announces his own framework. KEY: 1: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.php.general/190836/match= 2: http://www.tonymarston.net/aboutme/disasters.html -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php Owned? -- Kyle Terry | www.kyleterry.com
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:13, Per Jessen p...@computer.org wrote: Yes, I am serious, and no, I don't write php extensions etc. I don't write many web apps anyway. I do use PHP quite a bit for command line stuff, in fact for 95% of my scripts. Same her, Per. I actually use PHP for more command-line scripts and even GUI-enabled applications than I do for web scripts, almost like BASH on steroids. -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:13, Per Jessen p...@computer.org wrote: Yes, I am serious, and no, I don't write php extensions etc. I don't write many web apps anyway. I do use PHP quite a bit for command line stuff, in fact for 95% of my scripts. Same her, Per. I actually use PHP for more command-line scripts and even GUI-enabled applications than I do for web scripts, almost like BASH on steroids. -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php Aside from a few perl scripts, I have rewritten all my bash scripts in PHP. It's just easier to manage for me. -- Kyle Terry | www.kyleterry.com
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 13:22, Kyle Terry k...@kyleterry.com wrote: Aside from a few perl scripts, I have rewritten all my bash scripts in PHP. It's just easier to manage for me. /me nods. In 2001, I started rewriting a library of Perl scripts I'd been building since 1995 (5.0.0.1), which meant rewriting about 300 scripts. There's a single script left out of that library that I didn't convert, and only because it was the first usable Perl I'd ever written. Sentimental reasons, I suppose (and the fact that I rarely have a need for it). It just ran a recursive loop through directories to convert all file extensions from UPPER or Variable to lower case. -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 13:22, Kyle Terry k...@kyleterry.com wrote: Aside from a few perl scripts, I have rewritten all my bash scripts in PHP. It's just easier to manage for me. /me nods. In 2001, I started rewriting a library of Perl scripts I'd been building since 1995 (5.0.0.1), which meant rewriting about 300 scripts. There's a single script left out of that library that I didn't convert, and only because it was the first usable Perl I'd ever written. Sentimental reasons, I suppose (and the fact that I rarely have a need for it). It just ran a recursive loop through directories to convert all file extensions from UPPER or Variable to lower case. -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! Nice! I lied though, I use 1 python script that takes the ID3 tags from mp3s and oggs and makes the filename pretty. It does this recursively once a week through my music directory. -- Kyle Terry | www.kyleterry.com
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote in message news:ab5568160901191010u2d4073aas33789f0c81183...@mail.gmail.com... On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 12:36, Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk wrote: Really? In 2007 I single-handedly designed and built an ERP system with 130 database tables, 230 relationships and 1000 screens, all with PHP and without an ORM and static typing. This took me 6 months. If you can't equal that then either you are not much of a programmer, or your development style is not as good as you think it is. And yet, just a few months ago, you couldn't figure out how to launch a background process from PHP[1]. Launching a background process is easy (yes, even I can read the manual) but what I wanted to do was launch a background process and leave it running while the launching script continued on to something else. The example in the manual did not work for me, so I asked if there was an alternative solution. Lesson: Alzheimer's is a bitch. If you want a good ORM then write one yourself, or is that beyond your capabilities? Personally I wouldn't touch an ORM with a barge pole. I develop applications using the 3 Tier Architecture (no, it's not the same as MVC) with a Data Access layer that I can easily switch between MySQL, PostgreSQL and Oracle. If I can do it then why can't you? The pattern I note here is, I have been the best programmer since 1977, and the standard of 'Good v. Bad' must be judged by me. Now you're being disingenuous by quoting things which I did not say. I did not say that I have been the *best* programmer since 1977, nor did I say that the standard of Good v. Bad must be judged by me. I was just pointing out that if a simpleton like me can do those things then why can't all these so-called gurus? In your section My career history - disasters I have encountered[2], you list three projects that didn't go as expected. That's a great ratio, considering the level of success you've probably had in counter. I'd admit at least a dozen projects over the years that ended in failure or less-than-successfully. The issue I see is that, in the three examples, your summary of what led to the failure was the fault of others. That is correct. Every project where I was in charge and never ended in failure. It was only those projects which were controlled by others which goyt screwed up. Two of those were government contracts. Question: Why hath they forsaken Thee, Lord?!? If you spend a year writing useless code, then it's your fault, not PHPs. It's a bad workman who blames his tools. For this statement, I completely agree. Please, do not let others know that you agree with me. That might be seen as setting an embarrassing precedent. :) I'm not entirely sure where I see blame being placed on the language, but perhaps I've missed something. What I do see is that PHP is an adaptable language, intended to be molded, customized, and extended for each individual scenario. While changing the language in its core and releasing that as the official package will affect thousands of developers and countless lines of code, it is irresponsible and counterproductive to tell someone that they can not garner the opinions of others who would be interested to join in a project, outside of the core, to effect those changes; worse still to belittle someone in public. As the saying goes, 'tis better to keep one's mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. In writing, this is even truer. Observation: It is a bad workman who blames his tools, but it is a feeble-minded workman who shits where he eats: one who wastes billions of processor cycles to insult someone's intelligence in the same forum in which he announces his own framework. Why is it considerd bad form to insult the intelligence of a feeble minded twat who requests that PHP be changed from a dynamically typed to a statically typed language? He later changed it to type hinting on variables, but the original request was definitely for static typing. KEY: 1: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.php.general/190836/match= 2: http://www.tonymarston.net/aboutme/disasters.html -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 10:50 -0800, Kyle Terry wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 13:22, Kyle Terry k...@kyleterry.com wrote: Aside from a few perl scripts, I have rewritten all my bash scripts in PHP. It's just easier to manage for me. /me nods. In 2001, I started rewriting a library of Perl scripts I'd been building since 1995 (5.0.0.1), which meant rewriting about 300 scripts. There's a single script left out of that library that I didn't convert, and only because it was the first usable Perl I'd ever written. Sentimental reasons, I suppose (and the fact that I rarely have a need for it). It just ran a recursive loop through directories to convert all file extensions from UPPER or Variable to lower case. -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! Nice! I lied though, I use 1 python script that takes the ID3 tags from mp3s and oggs and makes the filename pretty. It does this recursively once a week through my music directory. I have a PHP script that does something similar :) Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.comwrote: On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 10:50 -0800, Kyle Terry wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 13:22, Kyle Terry k...@kyleterry.com wrote: Aside from a few perl scripts, I have rewritten all my bash scripts in PHP. It's just easier to manage for me. /me nods. In 2001, I started rewriting a library of Perl scripts I'd been building since 1995 (5.0.0.1), which meant rewriting about 300 scripts. There's a single script left out of that library that I didn't convert, and only because it was the first usable Perl I'd ever written. Sentimental reasons, I suppose (and the fact that I rarely have a need for it). It just ran a recursive loop through directories to convert all file extensions from UPPER or Variable to lower case. -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! Nice! I lied though, I use 1 python script that takes the ID3 tags from mp3s and oggs and makes the filename pretty. It does this recursively once a week through my music directory. I have a PHP script that does something similar :) Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP Maybe I'm due for a rewrite :) -- Kyle Terry | www.kyleterry.com
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Why are you guys Burning your egos here? Its not the right place. On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Kyle Terry k...@kyleterry.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote: On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 10:50 -0800, Kyle Terry wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 13:22, Kyle Terry k...@kyleterry.com wrote: Aside from a few perl scripts, I have rewritten all my bash scripts in PHP. It's just easier to manage for me. /me nods. In 2001, I started rewriting a library of Perl scripts I'd been building since 1995 (5.0.0.1), which meant rewriting about 300 scripts. There's a single script left out of that library that I didn't convert, and only because it was the first usable Perl I'd ever written. Sentimental reasons, I suppose (and the fact that I rarely have a need for it). It just ran a recursive loop through directories to convert all file extensions from UPPER or Variable to lower case. -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! Nice! I lied though, I use 1 python script that takes the ID3 tags from mp3s and oggs and makes the filename pretty. It does this recursively once a week through my music directory. I have a PHP script that does something similar :) Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP Maybe I'm due for a rewrite :) -- Kyle Terry | www.kyleterry.com
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 11:37 -0800, VamVan wrote: Why are you guys Burning your egos here? Its not the right place. Could you explain burning our egos? Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.comwrote: On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 11:37 -0800, VamVan wrote: Why are you guys Burning your egos here? Its not the right place. Could you explain burning our egos? Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP I was just about to ask the same thing. Also, I've been flamed for top posting before, so, don't top post. -- Kyle Terry | www.kyleterry.com
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 14:37, VamVan vamsee...@gmail.com wrote: Why are you guys Burning your egos here? Its not the right place. It's a PHP-related general discussion, Vam. Perhaps not entirely in good manners, but it's 100% relevant. Indeed, this is the right place. That aside, as intelligent folks, I think it's safe to say you all inherently have egos. I don't include myself in that same classification, as I'm mildly retarded. ;-P -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 14:50 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 14:37, VamVan vamsee...@gmail.com wrote: Why are you guys Burning your egos here? Its not the right place. It's a PHP-related general discussion, Vam. Perhaps not entirely in good manners, but it's 100% relevant. Indeed, this is the right place. That aside, as intelligent folks, I think it's safe to say you all inherently have egos. I don't include myself in that same classification, as I'm mildly retarded. ;-P WRONG!!! I killed off ego ages ago. Now it's just me and mr superego... he's next on my list! Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 2:37 PM, VamVan vamsee...@gmail.com wrote: Why are you guys Burning your egos here? Its not the right place. On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Kyle Terry k...@kyleterry.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.com wrote: On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 10:50 -0800, Kyle Terry wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 13:22, Kyle Terry k...@kyleterry.com wrote: Aside from a few perl scripts, I have rewritten all my bash scripts in PHP. It's just easier to manage for me. /me nods. In 2001, I started rewriting a library of Perl scripts I'd been building since 1995 (5.0.0.1), which meant rewriting about 300 scripts. There's a single script left out of that library that I didn't convert, and only because it was the first usable Perl I'd ever written. Sentimental reasons, I suppose (and the fact that I rarely have a need for it). It just ran a recursive loop through directories to convert all file extensions from UPPER or Variable to lower case. -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! Nice! I lied though, I use 1 python script that takes the ID3 tags from mp3s and oggs and makes the filename pretty. It does this recursively once a week through my music directory. I have a PHP script that does something similar :) Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP Maybe I'm due for a rewrite :) -- Kyle Terry | www.kyleterry.com It's community building. If everything's all work and serious people wouldn't be as interested in being here. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Robert Cummings rob...@interjinn.comwrote: On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 14:50 -0500, Daniel Brown wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 14:37, VamVan vamsee...@gmail.com wrote: Why are you guys Burning your egos here? Its not the right place. It's a PHP-related general discussion, Vam. Perhaps not entirely in good manners, but it's 100% relevant. Indeed, this is the right place. That aside, as intelligent folks, I think it's safe to say you all inherently have egos. I don't include myself in that same classification, as I'm mildly retarded. ;-P WRONG!!! I killed off ego ages ago. Now it's just me and mr superego... he's next on my list! Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP Either way, Vam still owes Dan dinner for Dan kindly handing his ass to him on a silver platter. My ego sits in my Debian coffee cup every morning. (* wait, I wish I had a Debian coffee cup *) -- Kyle Terry | www.kyleterry.com
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 14:37, VamVan vamsee...@gmail.com wrote: Why are you guys Burning your egos here? Its not the right place. It's a PHP-related general discussion, Vam. Perhaps not entirely in good manners, but it's 100% relevant. Indeed, this is the right place. I aplogize about top posting. I believe in Community building. My only concern was the kind of language used is very intimidating , that's all. Anyways cheers to all. I enjoy reading responses and asking questions here. This is the best group I have ever been involved with as long as I have started learning PHP. Thanks Again
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:05 PM, VamVan vamsee...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 14:37, VamVan vamsee...@gmail.com wrote: Why are you guys Burning your egos here? Its not the right place. It's a PHP-related general discussion, Vam. Perhaps not entirely in good manners, but it's 100% relevant. Indeed, this is the right place. I aplogize about top posting. I believe in Community building. My only concern was the kind of language used is very intimidating , that's all. Are you referring to bad language? Anyways cheers to all. I enjoy reading responses and asking questions here. This is the best group I have ever been involved with as long as I have started learning PHP. Thanks Again -- Kyle Terry | www.kyleterry.com
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 15:08, Kyle Terry k...@kyleterry.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:05 PM, VamVan vamsee...@gmail.com wrote: I believe in Community building. My only concern was the kind of language used is very intimidating , that's all. Are you referring to bad language? An unintended pun. Nice. ;-P -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Sat, 2009-01-17 at 20:45 +0100, Jochem Maas wrote: Skip Evans schreef: Tony Marston wrote: It's NOT just so we can blast each other and show off our highly dubiously assumed superiority. If I was Robbert Cummings I'd nail you on your grammar at this point, I don't want to steal his thunder so I won't. Hey dumbass... it's spelled Robert. Cheers, Rob. :) -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham wrote: Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: Tony Marston wrote: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. why not? Because your desired functionality is already satisfied by other programming languages. PHP is an interpreted language with all the strengths and weaknesses that come with it. A need for static or compile-time typing is a need for a different language, honestly. /Per Jessen, Zürich why so strongly against having *optional* static typing? You can't have your cake and eat it. You can't/shouldn't have strong and loose typing in the same language. In my opinion. IMHO if it was to classify all the languages (specifically server side languages for web apps), PHP has 95% of the features i need, the rest come no where near, so it's the obvious candidate to get this remaining 5% that'd make it perfect and open it up to a whole set of new users and markets. _If_ the remaining 5% will really open it up to a whole set of new users and markets, all you have to do is sit back and wait. I'm not so sure though. One of the great things about PHP is that it is easy and approachable for beginners, also without formal computer science training. Write some code, bang it in a webserver, and bob's your uncle. If we make PHP more complex, we might well lose that. By all means create a PHP++, but leave PHP as it is. It has enough feature-bloat already. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham wrote: point is.. Java let's me easily do 70% of what I need to PHP let's me easily do 95% of what I need to I'm curious - can you list what the 25% are? If we could get that 5% added then PHP would be perfect, not only that but me and the rest of the team at work would be able to make our multi-million pound enterprise projects in PHP instead of java; as would so many others (that can't be a bad thing for PHP) But why? Why not use Java and J2EE and all that good stuff? I'm not much of a java fan myself, but you've got to give credit where credit is due. Additionally, rather sure you'd see a mass influx of people moving to php, and applications created for it - even down to design tools such as reverse and forward engineering between uml and php. ack.. there's a tonne of amazing tools and frameworks for java, and I'm sure that a vast majority of them are possible because of this static typing (from orms to web service frameworks and all in between) - am I so bad for wanting that for php and my fellow devs? No, you're not so bad :-) The point is - why not just use Java, when you really need the features? /Per Jessen, Zürich -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? It's NOT just so we can blast each other and show off our highly dubiously assumed superiority. With all the frustrations we put up with in our daily lives, I would hope a list like this, especially since we are among colleagues, could be a place we could at least cautiously expect to be treated with respect. Then the OP should respect PHP for what it is, and not request changes that would make it unusable for 99.999% of the millions of programmers who have already written millions of programs with it. PHP is successful because of the way it works, and changing the way it works, as suggested by the OP, would not make it more successful. On the contrary, I think that it would PHuck it up completely. But that's just my opinion. -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org -- Skip Evans Big Sky Penguin, LLC 503 S Baldwin St, #1 Madison WI 53703 608.250.2720 http://bigskypenguin.com Those of you who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. -- Kurt Vonnegut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message
news:49723749.4070...@gmail.com...
Tony Marston wrote:
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message
a: Optional Static Typing
I'm finding an ever increasingly need to be able to staticly type
properties, parameters, return types etc (in classes) I know there is
type hinting but it's just not enough to do what one needs. Additionally
support for staticly typing primatives. Here's an example:
If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use
PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs.
why not? php fills 95% of my needs in most instances, I'm as much a valid
user of php as you and php *could* change to fit my needs and others, not
without some appreciated work mind you, but it could (and without
affecting anybody else in this case)
ABSOLUTE RUBBISH! You cannot change PHP from being dynamicly typed to
staticly typed without affecting 99% of the millions of programs which hav
already been written.
Personally I love the idea that a function's argument can be either a string
or an array (or whatever) as PHP makes it easy to detect what type it is,
and I can easily cast it to another type and deal with it as I see fit. This
to me is a GREAT ADVANTAGE and NOT a limitation.
it's a simple need: if I can type that my variable can only contain an
int, then I know it's always an int without tonnes of checks to check it
actually contains an int / is getting set with an int throughout the rest
of the app (especially when multiple dev's are working on it).
additionally this functionality would open the door to the creation of a
lot more apps and frameworks,
Not in my (not so humble) opinion.
not least the ability to create decent ORM's.
Proper progammers do not need any steeenking ORMs.
Further, it would allow people to contribute proper developers classes
that can be re-used time and time again
Your definition of proper obviously disagrees with mine.
(for instance a full set of collections [class, hashmap, map, list, set
etc etc]). Once they're made and open source we all benefit, not only that
but they could be made by users instead of the internals team ;)
b: Object superclass
A base class type which all objects automagically extend, with (if
nothing else) a unique id / hashcode for each object (much like the Java
Object class). Failing this some form of function to get a unique
reference string for any variable. Example
Why should each class automaticaly extend a base class? For what purpose?
For what benefit? I can achieve what I want without this *feature*, so I
don't need it.
2 reasons:
1: it would allow all objects to have this uniqueid/hashcode i need
2: it would allow one to type hint Object in methods (you currently
can't) - you can method(array $var) but not method(object $var) see:
?php
class Example {
public function someMethod(object $arg0) {
}
}
$e = new Example();
$e-someMethod( (object)'y' );
?
returns: Catchable fatal error: Argument 1 passed to
Example::someMethod() must be an instance of object
Why does each object need a unique id/hashcode? I have been using objects
for years without this so it is not necessary, and does not provide any
additional functionality.
for comparison of equality, so you can make indexed arrays quickly using
the hashcode (you know like a hash table) so you can quickly tell the
difference between two instances of the same object with the same values
that are infact different, makes persisting data a 100 times easier...
Why do you need a unique reference string for each variable? WTF!
well because $a = 's'; $b = 's'; both are unique, internally php must hold
a reference of some sort to each variable and where it's stored that is
entirely unique; it would simply be a case of exposing this functionality
/or/ adding functionality based on this.
c: Method overloading
TBH it's something I could live without, whereas a/b aren't, but it
would be an ideal addition to php?
PHP does not need method overloading as is found in other languages as it
has optional parameters with defaults. It is also possible to cast each
parameter into wahetever type is necessary. It achieves the same result
but using a different method.
the same functionality can be achieved, however not without a lot of
additional code to test variable types using conditional blocks with lots
of is_ and instanceof comparisons; adding method overloading is by no
means needed but would majorly simplify the code of scripts which need
this functionality.
I disagree.
Absolute rubbish! You have obviously been used to a different language
and have recently moved to PHP, but cannot get used to the fact that it
*IS* a different language, therefore it has different syntax and achieves
similar things in different ways. If your feeble brain can't handle the
differences then I suggest you stick with
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Jochem Maas joc...@iamjochem.com wrote in message news:4972365b.4060...@iamjochem.com... Daniel Brown schreef: Well, since Nathan asked especially for the opinions of those who would disagree with him, I thought all was well On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 13:33, Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk wrote: If your feeble brain can't handle the differences then I suggest you stick with your previous language and LEAVE PHP ALONE! until this line. Can't quite tell if it's a joke or what it was. Kinda' killed the validity of the rest of the message. I guess it's the old adage: it's not what you say, it's the way that you say it It's a pity his brain is wired directly to his arse, as opposed to his mouth, because I believe his brain is actually quite sharp I'll take that as a compliment. :) ... unfortunately it all comes out covered in . I'll take that as an insult. :( -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org PS - I must be bored, I've sent more posts in the last ten minutes than I have in the last 6 months ;) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
I will be brief. Tony is a dick. Peace Love, Skip Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? It's NOT just so we can blast each other and show off our highly dubiously assumed superiority. With all the frustrations we put up with in our daily lives, I would hope a list like this, especially since we are among colleagues, could be a place we could at least cautiously expect to be treated with respect. Then the OP should respect PHP for what it is, and not request changes that would make it unusable for 99.999% of the millions of programmers who have already written millions of programs with it. PHP is successful because of the way it works, and changing the way it works, as suggested by the OP, would not make it more successful. On the contrary, I think that it would PHuck it up completely. But that's just my opinion. -- Skip Evans Big Sky Penguin, LLC 503 S Baldwin St, #1 Madison WI 53703 608.250.2720 http://bigskypenguin.com Those of you who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. -- Kurt Vonnegut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49733d18.6080...@bigskypenguin.com... I will be brief. Tony is a dick. To quote your own words: There's just no need to insult other list members like this. -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org Peace Love, Skip Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? It's NOT just so we can blast each other and show off our highly dubiously assumed superiority. With all the frustrations we put up with in our daily lives, I would hope a list like this, especially since we are among colleagues, could be a place we could at least cautiously expect to be treated with respect. Then the OP should respect PHP for what it is, and not request changes that would make it unusable for 99.999% of the millions of programmers who have already written millions of programs with it. PHP is successful because of the way it works, and changing the way it works, as suggested by the OP, would not make it more successful. On the contrary, I think that it would PHuck it up completely. But that's just my opinion. -- Skip Evans Big Sky Penguin, LLC 503 S Baldwin St, #1 Madison WI 53703 608.250.2720 http://bigskypenguin.com Those of you who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. -- Kurt Vonnegut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
You're right, and as soon as you apologize to Nathan for calling him feeble minded (and promise to adjust your attitude) I will apologize to you. I also think it would be a good idea for you to address the rest of the list and assure everyone you will try to be more polite in the future. Skip PS. And then adopt an abandoned puppy. Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49733d18.6080...@bigskypenguin.com... I will be brief. Tony is a dick. To quote your own words: There's just no need to insult other list members like this. -- Skip Evans Big Sky Penguin, LLC 503 S Baldwin St, #1 Madison WI 53703 608.250.2720 http://bigskypenguin.com Those of you who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. -- Kurt Vonnegut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: Tony Marston wrote: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. why not? Because your desired functionality is already satisfied by other programming languages. PHP is an interpreted language with all the strengths and weaknesses that come with it. A need for static or compile-time typing is a need for a different language, honestly. /Per Jessen, Zürich why so strongly against having *optional* static typing? You can't have your cake and eat it. You can't/shouldn't have strong and loose typing in the same language. In my opinion. Instead of providing programmers with a black or white choice between static or dynamic typing, we should instead strive for softer type systems. That is, static typing where possible, dynamic typing when needed. Unfortunately there is a discontinuity between contemporary statically typed and dynamically typed languages as well as a huge technical and cultural gap between the respective language communities. The problems surrounding hybrid statically and dynamically typed languages are largely not understood, and both camps often use arguments that cut no ice. We argue that there is no need to polarize the differences, and instead we should focus on leveraging the strengths of each side. [1] IMHO if it was to classify all the languages (specifically server side languages for web apps), PHP has 95% of the features i need, the rest come no where near, so it's the obvious candidate to get this remaining 5% that'd make it perfect and open it up to a whole set of new users and markets. _If_ the remaining 5% will really open it up to a whole set of new users and markets, all you have to do is sit back and wait. I'm not so sure though. One of the great things about PHP is that it is easy and approachable for beginners, also without formal computer science training. Write some code, bang it in a webserver, and bob's your uncle. If we make PHP more complex, we might well lose that. completely agree; it would all be optional though (much like the already existing type hinting) - so I can't see it having any impact on anybody already using php or anybody learning (any negative imapact that is) By all means create a PHP++, but leave PHP as it is. It has enough feature-bloat already. you do have a good point, I've thought that myself often and indeed it was brought up in the namespace discussions - however if it's optional then why fork? * 1 - http://pico.vub.ac.be/~wdmeuter/RDL04/papers/Meijer.pdf -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham wrote: You can't have your cake and eat it. You can't/shouldn't have strong and loose typing in the same language. In my opinion. Instead of providing programmers with a black or white choice between static or dynamic typing, we should instead strive for softer type systems. That is, static typing where possible, dynamic typing when needed. Unfortunately there is a discontinuity between contemporary statically typed and dynamically typed languages as well as a huge technical and cultural gap between the respective language communities. I'm not sure whether to take you seriously now - you're quoting from a Microsoft research paper? :-) By all means create a PHP++, but leave PHP as it is. It has enough feature-bloat already. you do have a good point, I've thought that myself often and indeed it was brought up in the namespace discussions - however if it's optional then why fork? Because it would be such a major change (as Tony has also pointed out) - ones PHP code would work with php -normal, but would fail miserably with php -strongtyping. In essence, with your optional strong typing enabled, you'd have a different language. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: point is.. Java let's me easily do 70% of what I need to PHP let's me easily do 95% of what I need to I'm curious - can you list what the 25% are? it lacks dynamic typing, the ability to procedural code and its precompiled not interpreted; all in a hello world in php is 10 seconds, in java it's nigh on 10 minutes. Hence why php is such a good language If we could get that 5% added then PHP would be perfect, not only that but me and the rest of the team at work would be able to make our multi-million pound enterprise projects in PHP instead of java; as would so many others (that can't be a bad thing for PHP) But why? Why not use Java and J2EE and all that good stuff? I'm not much of a java fan myself, but you've got to give credit where credit is due. well I can give two examples: Three other PHP Developers and myself spent the best part of a year creating a large multi-site event management system in PHP; the whole process was deeply frustrating primarily due to the lack of optional static typing and there in the lack of a solid ORM; with this small addition the whole process would have been a 6 month process if that, and a far more pleasurable experience. Currently 7 other Java developers and myself are building a large multisite transportation management and ticketing system in Java, this is a 9 month project with a decent sized and very skilled team; because of the lack of static typing (and thus the lack of development tools and frameworks/orms for PHP) we've had to go with Java; TBH the static typing is only needed on the domain model and the api layer, the bulk of the business logic in between where the majority of the work comes in, would be a great deal easier using a mix of procedural code and dynamic typing. I'd argue that again the development time of this project could be halfed if it was done in PHP AND if in PHP had support for optional static typing coupled with a good ORM. Further the difference between precompilation and interpretation is v noticable when it comes to rolling applications out, often in development you want to run a hlaf built or broken application to see what happens and check if parts x y and z are good + to test your infrastructure; when you can't compile and do this testing becuase the app isn't bug free or completed it's rather limiting. Sometimes unit tests just don't cover what you need. Additionally, rather sure you'd see a mass influx of people moving to php, and applications created for it - even down to design tools such as reverse and forward engineering between uml and php. ack.. there's a tonne of amazing tools and frameworks for java, and I'm sure that a vast majority of them are possible because of this static typing (from orms to web service frameworks and all in between) - am I so bad for wanting that for php and my fellow devs? No, you're not so bad :-) The point is - why not just use Java, when you really need the features? the cases above should show why, fact is (imho) PHP would be a far better language than java for web based applications in 99% of cases if it had this optional static typing and the tools that allows. *IF* it did, then 10 other people and myself wouldn't have wasted a year of there lives on writing what could be unneeded code; I'm sure I'm not the only one in this position. I've already quoted this, but in this context I feel it's appropriate to reiterate: Instead of providing programmers with a black or white choice between static or dynamic typing, we should instead strive for softer type systems. That is, static typing where possible, dynamic typing when needed. Unfortunately there is a discontinuity between contemporary statically typed and dynamically typed languages as well as a huge technical and cultural gap between the respective language communities. The problems surrounding hybrid statically and dynamically typed languages are largely not understood, and both camps often use arguments that cut no ice. We argue that there is no need to polarize the differences, and instead we should focus on leveraging the strengths of each side. Regards! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: You can't have your cake and eat it. You can't/shouldn't have strong and loose typing in the same language. In my opinion. Instead of providing programmers with a black or white choice between static or dynamic typing, we should instead strive for softer type systems. That is, static typing where possible, dynamic typing when needed. Unfortunately there is a discontinuity between contemporary statically typed and dynamically typed languages as well as a huge technical and cultural gap between the respective language communities. I'm not sure whether to take you seriously now - you're quoting from a Microsoft research paper? :-) lol well picked up - for all I'm a linux fan M$ aren't all bad and hell they must have some very good programmers in the various teams, seems a shame to invalidate thier hard work and research just because they work for satan. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham wrote: If we could get that 5% added then PHP would be perfect, not only that but me and the rest of the team at work would be able to make our multi-million pound enterprise projects in PHP instead of java; as would so many others (that can't be a bad thing for PHP) But why? Why not use Java and J2EE and all that good stuff? I'm not much of a java fan myself, but you've got to give credit where credit is due. well I can give two examples: Three other PHP Developers and myself spent the best part of a year creating a large multi-site event management system in PHP; the whole process was deeply frustrating primarily due to the lack of optional static typing and there in the lack of a solid ORM; with this small addition the whole process would have been a 6 month process if that, and a far more pleasurable experience. I think that's at best an example of someone having chosen the wrong tool. I can easily appreciate the frustration. My own rule-of-thumb - scripts are for small things and rapid prototyping. Once when a script (regardless of language) grows towards 1000 lines, start thinking about writing it in C (or whatever else is appropriate). I know of too many situations where thousands of lines of script code have turned into maintenance nightmares. Currently 7 other Java developers and myself are building a large multisite transportation management and ticketing system in Java, this is a 9 month project with a decent sized and very skilled team; because of the lack of static typing (and thus the lack of development tools and frameworks/orms for PHP) we've had to go with Java; TBH the static typing is only needed on the domain model and the api layer, the bulk of the business logic in between where the majority of the work comes in, would be a great deal easier using a mix of procedural code and dynamic typing. I'd argue that again the development time of this project could be halfed if it was done in PHP AND if in PHP had support for optional static typing coupled with a good ORM. First of all - development time is largely irrelevant, Nathan - I think the standard rule is that program lifetime = 25% development time + 75% maintenance time. Second - instead of discussing optional strong typing for PHP, I think you need to look at why your productivity in Java is only half of that of PHP. Your tools for Java development are far more sophisticated, you've got the strong typing you want - what's reducing your productivity? Further the difference between precompilation and interpretation is v noticable when it comes to rolling applications out, often in development you want to run a hlaf built or broken application to see what happens and check if parts x y and z are good + to test your infrastructure; when you can't compile and do this testing becuase the app isn't bug free or completed it's rather limiting. Sometimes unit tests just don't cover what you need. I agree. You need a full blown test system. That is pretty much the norm in a corporate environment - I've certainly never worked anywhere that didn't have separate test systems. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. agreed, tone and meaning are so hard to convey using written words alone. (you did say I was feeble brained though..) Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. you think not; I know they'd raise my productivity in php somewhat and increase the scope where I can use php. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. inexperienced I am not, perfect I am not. all questions are good questions, how can things progress when nobody questions? I love the way currently php works and I'd like (and can see a need in certain circumstances for) a bit of optional functionality which would increase, yes my, productivity. I'm sure though if this can increase my productivity it can increase others as well - I'd like to hear from some of the spl_ and pdo_ devs on this, not to mention those who currently make orm's for php such as the one in symphony. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? there you go with the feeble minded again tony.. a: this wasn't a useless request, it was a request for opinions and votes. b: I'm used to PHP, it is my one of my current primary languages and has been for a long time; I help others with both simple and complex problems on this list and devote a hell of a lot of my personal time to helping people use php to do what they want. I am definately an advocate of php, contribute to open source projects and release packages which many thousands of people around the world use. I've also used many other languages and can see advantages and disadvantages to all of them; I'm not so niave or feeble minded to think that php is perfect the way it is, it's not - but it's a damn good language. c: nothing I'm suggesting would have any effect on you're php the cobol way approach, I can easily cope with the difference, can you comprehend that it wouldn't be changing any existing functionality only adding new *optional* functionality. PHP has support for objects and classes, right down to type hinting on arguments, exceptions, inheritance, reflection the whole lot - to add in the bits that are missing seems rather logical to me; thats why we've got the OO features that already exist. give me one good reason why optional type hinting / static typing of class properties and normal variables would be a bad thing? and another of how it would have any impact at all on you. It's NOT just so we can blast each other and show off our highly dubiously assumed superiority. With all the frustrations we put up with in our daily lives, I would hope a list like this, especially since we are among colleagues, could be a place we could at least cautiously expect to be treated with respect. Then the OP should respect PHP for what it is, and not request changes that would make it unusable for 99.999% of the millions of programmers who have already written millions of programs with it. PHP is successful because of the way it works, and changing the way it works, as suggested by the OP, would not make it more successful. On the contrary, I think that it would PHuck it up completely. But that's just my opinion. make it unusable for 99.999% of the millions of programmers who have already written millions of programs with it - eh.. read tony; OPTIONAL, this wouldn't have any impact or break any bc if done correctly - just like typehinting on methods didn't.. php would work the same, just add in some *optional* functionality for those who do need it, or
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:497354c3.9090...@gmail.com... Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: point is.. Java let's me easily do 70% of what I need to PHP let's me easily do 95% of what I need to I'm curious - can you list what the 25% are? it lacks dynamic typing, the ability to procedural code and its precompiled not interpreted; all in a hello world in php is 10 seconds, in java it's nigh on 10 minutes. Hence why php is such a good language If we could get that 5% added then PHP would be perfect, not only that but me and the rest of the team at work would be able to make our multi-million pound enterprise projects in PHP instead of java; as would so many others (that can't be a bad thing for PHP) But why? Why not use Java and J2EE and all that good stuff? I'm not much of a java fan myself, but you've got to give credit where credit is due. well I can give two examples: Three other PHP Developers and myself spent the best part of a year creating a large multi-site event management system in PHP; the whole process was deeply frustrating primarily due to the lack of optional static typing and there in the lack of a solid ORM; with this small addition the whole process would have been a 6 month process if that, and a far more pleasurable experience. Really? In 2007 I single-handedly designed and built an ERP system with 130 database tables, 230 relationships and 1000 screens, all with PHP and without an ORM and static typing. This took me 6 months. If you can't equal that then either you are not much of a programmer, or your development style is not as good as you think it is. If other people can write perfectly good applications in PHP without the extra features that you say are indispensible then why can't you? Currently 7 other Java developers and myself are building a large multisite transportation management and ticketing system in Java, this is a 9 month project with a decent sized and very skilled team; because of the lack of static typing (and thus the lack of development tools and frameworks/orms for PHP) we've had to go with Java; TBH the static typing is only needed on the domain model and the api layer, the bulk of the business logic in between where the majority of the work comes in, would be a great deal easier using a mix of procedural code and dynamic typing. I'd argue that again the development time of this project could be halfed if it was done in PHP AND if in PHP had support for optional static typing coupled with a good ORM. If you want a good ORM then write one yourself, or is that beyond your capabilities? Personally I wouldn't touch an ORM with a barge pole. I develop applications using the 3 Tier Architecture (no, it's not the same as MVC) with a Data Access layer that I can easily switch between MySQL, PostgreSQL and Oracle. If I can do it then why can't you? Further the difference between precompilation and interpretation is v noticable when it comes to rolling applications out, often in development you want to run a hlaf built or broken application to see what happens and check if parts x y and z are good + to test your infrastructure; when you can't compile and do this testing becuase the app isn't bug free or completed it's rather limiting. Sometimes unit tests just don't cover what you need. Additionally, rather sure you'd see a mass influx of people moving to php, and applications created for it - even down to design tools such as reverse and forward engineering between uml and php. ack.. there's a tonne of amazing tools and frameworks for java, and I'm sure that a vast majority of them are possible because of this static typing (from orms to web service frameworks and all in between) - am I so bad for wanting that for php and my fellow devs? No, you're not so bad :-) The point is - why not just use Java, when you really need the features? the cases above should show why, fact is (imho) PHP would be a far better language than java for web based applications in 99% of cases if it had this optional static typing and the tools that allows. *IF* it did, then 10 other people and myself wouldn't have wasted a year of there lives on writing what could be unneeded code; I'm sure I'm not the only one in this position. If you spend a year writing useless code, then it's your fault, not PHPs. It's a bad workman who blames his tools. -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org I've already quoted this, but in this context I feel it's appropriate to reiterate: Instead of providing programmers with a black or white choice between static or dynamic typing, we should instead strive for softer type systems. That is, static typing where possible, dynamic typing when needed. Unfortunately there is a discontinuity between contemporary statically typed and dynamically typed languages as well as a huge technical
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham wrote: Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: You can't have your cake and eat it. You can't/shouldn't have strong and loose typing in the same language. In my opinion. Instead of providing programmers with a black or white choice between static or dynamic typing, we should instead strive for softer type systems. That is, static typing where possible, dynamic typing when needed. Unfortunately there is a discontinuity between contemporary statically typed and dynamically typed languages as well as a huge technical and cultural gap between the respective language communities. I'm not sure whether to take you seriously now - you're quoting from a Microsoft research paper? :-) lol well picked up - for all I'm a linux fan M$ aren't all bad and hell they must have some very good programmers in the various teams, seems a shame to invalidate thier hard work and research just because they work for satan. Completely agree, I just thought I'd score an easy point ... /Per Jessen, Zürich -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:497366f5.2030...@gmail.com... Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. agreed, tone and meaning are so hard to convey using written words alone. (you did say I was feeble brained though..) Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. you think not; I know they'd raise my productivity in php somewhat and increase the scope where I can use php. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. inexperienced I am not, perfect I am not. all questions are good questions, how can things progress when nobody questions? I love the way currently php works and I'd like (and can see a need in certain circumstances for) a bit of optional functionality which would increase, yes my, productivity. I'm sure though if this can increase my productivity it can increase others as well - I'd like to hear from some of the spl_ and pdo_ devs on this, not to mention those who currently make orm's for php such as the one in symphony. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? there you go with the feeble minded again tony.. a: this wasn't a useless request, it was a request for opinions and votes. Yes, I think that any programmer who wants to change PHP so that it looks and feels more like his current language of choice simply because he cannot cope with the differences is feeble minded. b: I'm used to PHP, it is my one of my current primary languages and has been for a long time; I help others with both simple and complex problems on this list and devote a hell of a lot of my personal time to helping people use php to do what they want. I am definately an advocate of php, contribute to open source projects and release packages which many thousands of people around the world use. I've also used many other languages and can see advantages and disadvantages to all of them; I'm not so niave or feeble minded to think that php is perfect the way it is, it's not - but it's a damn good language. c: nothing I'm suggesting would have any effect on you're php the cobol way approach, I can easily cope with the difference, can you comprehend that it wouldn't be changing any existing functionality only adding new *optional* functionality. As others have already pointed out it would simply not be feasible to change PHP so that it can be switched between dynamic typing to static typing at the flick of a switch. PHP is dynamicly typed, so either get used to it or switch to a different language. -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org PHP has support for objects and classes, right down to type hinting on arguments, exceptions, inheritance, reflection the whole lot - to add in the bits that are missing seems rather logical to me; thats why we've got the OO features that already exist. give me one good reason why optional type hinting / static typing of class properties and normal variables would be a bad thing? and another of how it would have any impact at all on you. It's NOT just so we can blast each other and show off our highly dubiously assumed superiority. With all the frustrations we put up with in our daily lives, I would hope a list like this, especially since we are among colleagues, could be a place we could at least cautiously expect to be treated with respect. Then the OP should respect PHP for what it is, and not request changes that would make it unusable for 99.999% of the
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Per Jessen schreef: Nathan Rixham wrote: Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: You can't have your cake and eat it. You can't/shouldn't have strong and loose typing in the same language. In my opinion. Instead of providing programmers with a black or white choice between static or dynamic typing, we should instead strive for softer type systems. That is, static typing where possible, dynamic typing when needed. Unfortunately there is a discontinuity between contemporary statically typed and dynamically typed languages as well as a huge technical and cultural gap between the respective language communities. I'm not sure whether to take you seriously now - you're quoting from a Microsoft research paper? :-) lol well picked up - for all I'm a linux fan M$ aren't all bad and hell they must have some very good programmers in the various teams, seems a shame to invalidate thier hard work and research just because they work for satan. Completely agree, I just thought I'd score an easy point ... +1 to you both :-) /Per Jessen, Zürich -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Tony Marston wrote: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:497354c3.9090...@gmail.com... Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: point is.. Java let's me easily do 70% of what I need to PHP let's me easily do 95% of what I need to I'm curious - can you list what the 25% are? it lacks dynamic typing, the ability to procedural code and its precompiled not interpreted; all in a hello world in php is 10 seconds, in java it's nigh on 10 minutes. Hence why php is such a good language If we could get that 5% added then PHP would be perfect, not only that but me and the rest of the team at work would be able to make our multi-million pound enterprise projects in PHP instead of java; as would so many others (that can't be a bad thing for PHP) But why? Why not use Java and J2EE and all that good stuff? I'm not much of a java fan myself, but you've got to give credit where credit is due. well I can give two examples: Three other PHP Developers and myself spent the best part of a year creating a large multi-site event management system in PHP; the whole process was deeply frustrating primarily due to the lack of optional static typing and there in the lack of a solid ORM; with this small addition the whole process would have been a 6 month process if that, and a far more pleasurable experience. Really? In 2007 I single-handedly designed and built an ERP system with 130 database tables, 230 relationships and 1000 screens, all with PHP and without an ORM and static typing. This took me 6 months. If you can't equal that then either you are not much of a programmer, or your development style is not as good as you think it is. If other people can write perfectly good applications in PHP without the extra features that you say are indispensible then why can't you? clap clap, would you like to compare dick size? You have no idea of the size or scope of the applications I've developed by myself or as part of team tony, so why even attempt to comment? Why assume that I haven't written perfectly good applications in PHP and that incapable of it when the opposite is true. Again tony, nobody is knocking php simply saying that in some scenarios development time could be speeded up by adding in static typing; perhaps you've not came accross this but I and others have. Currently 7 other Java developers and myself are building a large multisite transportation management and ticketing system in Java, this is a 9 month project with a decent sized and very skilled team; because of the lack of static typing (and thus the lack of development tools and frameworks/orms for PHP) we've had to go with Java; TBH the static typing is only needed on the domain model and the api layer, the bulk of the business logic in between where the majority of the work comes in, would be a great deal easier using a mix of procedural code and dynamic typing. I'd argue that again the development time of this project could be halfed if it was done in PHP AND if in PHP had support for optional static typing coupled with a good ORM. If you want a good ORM then write one yourself, or is that beyond your capabilities? already am tony, and have spotted areas where by adding optional static typing: a: it could be improved b: code could be optimized c: development time could be considerably reduced Personally I wouldn't touch an ORM with a barge pole. I develop applications using the 3 Tier Architecture (no, it's not the same as MVC) with a Data Access layer that I can easily switch between MySQL, PostgreSQL and Oracle. If I can do it then why can't you? likewise, although I would touch an ORM in certain cases (but not with your barge pole), frequently use modified n-tier or the good ol 3 tier architecture with preference going to using a class based oo paradigm rather than a prototype style, and have written many data access and persistance layers which can switch between different RDBMS both pre pdo and post pdo. If I can see the need for this.. why can't you? weg Further the difference between precompilation and interpretation is v noticable when it comes to rolling applications out, often in development you want to run a hlaf built or broken application to see what happens and check if parts x y and z are good + to test your infrastructure; when you can't compile and do this testing becuase the app isn't bug free or completed it's rather limiting. Sometimes unit tests just don't cover what you need. Additionally, rather sure you'd see a mass influx of people moving to php, and applications created for it - even down to design tools such as reverse and forward engineering between uml and php. ack.. there's a tonne of amazing tools and frameworks for java, and I'm sure that a vast majority of them are possible because of this static typing (from orms to web service frameworks and all in between) - am I so bad for wanting that for php and my fellow devs? No, you're not so
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Tony Marston wrote: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:497366f5.2030...@gmail.com... Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. agreed, tone and meaning are so hard to convey using written words alone. (you did say I was feeble brained though..) Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. you think not; I know they'd raise my productivity in php somewhat and increase the scope where I can use php. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. inexperienced I am not, perfect I am not. all questions are good questions, how can things progress when nobody questions? I love the way currently php works and I'd like (and can see a need in certain circumstances for) a bit of optional functionality which would increase, yes my, productivity. I'm sure though if this can increase my productivity it can increase others as well - I'd like to hear from some of the spl_ and pdo_ devs on this, not to mention those who currently make orm's for php such as the one in symphony. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? there you go with the feeble minded again tony.. a: this wasn't a useless request, it was a request for opinions and votes. Yes, I think that any programmer who wants to change PHP so that it looks and feels more like his current language of choice simply because he cannot cope with the differences is feeble minded. but tony.. PHP is my current language of choice.. b: I'm used to PHP, it is my one of my current primary languages and has been for a long time; I help others with both simple and complex problems on this list and devote a hell of a lot of my personal time to helping people use php to do what they want. I am definately an advocate of php, contribute to open source projects and release packages which many thousands of people around the world use. I've also used many other languages and can see advantages and disadvantages to all of them; I'm not so niave or feeble minded to think that php is perfect the way it is, it's not - but it's a damn good language. c: nothing I'm suggesting would have any effect on you're php the cobol way approach, I can easily cope with the difference, can you comprehend that it wouldn't be changing any existing functionality only adding new *optional* functionality. As others have already pointed out it would simply not be feasible to change PHP so that it can be switched between dynamic typing to static typing at the flick of a switch. PHP is dynamicly typed, so either get used to it or switch to a different language. flick of a switch? I'd be suggesting fully implemented optional code. php is dynamically typed WITH type hinting on methods, this would just be type hinting on variables as well. why switch when a: php could have this implemented b: I'm capable of using multiple languages and picking the correct one for each scenario. c: there is a gap between dynamic and statically typed languages that php already addresses in part with typehinting on methods, it could fully address this gap easily and be the best of both world for strict and dynamic typers, just like it pretty much does for procedural and oo coders. ps: already am used to it, will continue to be, but would like to see it implemented. pps: rar rar rar tony, are you tony the tiger from that breakfast cerial? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Jochem Maas wrote: Per Jessen schreef: Nathan Rixham wrote: Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: You can't have your cake and eat it. You can't/shouldn't have strong and loose typing in the same language. In my opinion. Instead of providing programmers with a black or white choice between static or dynamic typing, we should instead strive for softer type systems. That is, static typing where possible, dynamic typing when needed. Unfortunately there is a discontinuity between contemporary statically typed and dynamically typed languages as well as a huge technical and cultural gap between the respective language communities. I'm not sure whether to take you seriously now - you're quoting from a Microsoft research paper? :-) lol well picked up - for all I'm a linux fan M$ aren't all bad and hell they must have some very good programmers in the various teams, seems a shame to invalidate thier hard work and research just because they work for satan. Completely agree, I just thought I'd score an easy point ... +1 to you both :-) omfg positivety returns to the list :-D cheers guys! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
2009/1/18 Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:497366f5.2030...@gmail.com... Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. agreed, tone and meaning are so hard to convey using written words alone. (you did say I was feeble brained though..) Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. you think not; I know they'd raise my productivity in php somewhat and increase the scope where I can use php. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. inexperienced I am not, perfect I am not. all questions are good questions, how can things progress when nobody questions? I love the way currently php works and I'd like (and can see a need in certain circumstances for) a bit of optional functionality which would increase, yes my, productivity. I'm sure though if this can increase my productivity it can increase others as well - I'd like to hear from some of the spl_ and pdo_ devs on this, not to mention those who currently make orm's for php such as the one in symphony. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? there you go with the feeble minded again tony.. a: this wasn't a useless request, it was a request for opinions and votes. Yes, I think that any programmer who wants to change PHP so that it looks and feels more like his current language of choice simply because he cannot cope with the differences is feeble minded. And I think any participant on this list who cannot reasonably respond to perfectly reasonable suggestions without resorting to child-like name-calling should reconsider their personal brand. Every time I see you contribute to this list you manage to lessen the respect I have for you as a person nevermind as a developer. PHP would not have the OO capabilities it has if developers hadn't compared it to other languages and said yes, that would be a useful addition. Improvements don't happen without inspiration, and definitely won't happen if people feel threatened when they make suggestions. b: I'm used to PHP, it is my one of my current primary languages and has been for a long time; I help others with both simple and complex problems on this list and devote a hell of a lot of my personal time to helping people use php to do what they want. I am definately an advocate of php, contribute to open source projects and release packages which many thousands of people around the world use. I've also used many other languages and can see advantages and disadvantages to all of them; I'm not so niave or feeble minded to think that php is perfect the way it is, it's not - but it's a damn good language. c: nothing I'm suggesting would have any effect on you're php the cobol way approach, I can easily cope with the difference, can you comprehend that it wouldn't be changing any existing functionality only adding new *optional* functionality. As others have already pointed out it would simply not be feasible to change PHP so that it can be switched between dynamic typing to static typing at the flick of a switch. PHP is dynamicly typed, so either get used to it or switch to a different language. I don't recall seeing anyone say it's not feasible, just that it comes with costs other PHP developers might not be happy with. Performance makes it tricky, BC could make it tricky and there's probably a whole bunch of other issues that might make it difficult, but it's certainly possible. As far as your if I can do it why can't you comment goes,
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:49737051.9080...@gmail.com... Tony Marston wrote: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:497366f5.2030...@gmail.com... Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. agreed, tone and meaning are so hard to convey using written words alone. (you did say I was feeble brained though..) Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. you think not; I know they'd raise my productivity in php somewhat and increase the scope where I can use php. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. inexperienced I am not, perfect I am not. all questions are good questions, how can things progress when nobody questions? I love the way currently php works and I'd like (and can see a need in certain circumstances for) a bit of optional functionality which would increase, yes my, productivity. I'm sure though if this can increase my productivity it can increase others as well - I'd like to hear from some of the spl_ and pdo_ devs on this, not to mention those who currently make orm's for php such as the one in symphony. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? there you go with the feeble minded again tony.. a: this wasn't a useless request, it was a request for opinions and votes. Yes, I think that any programmer who wants to change PHP so that it looks and feels more like his current language of choice simply because he cannot cope with the differences is feeble minded. but tony.. PHP is my current language of choice.. If it is your language of choice the it must be better than the alernatives. So if it is better then why are you saying that it is virually unusable without the improvements that you have suggested? b: I'm used to PHP, it is my one of my current primary languages and has been for a long time; I help others with both simple and complex problems on this list and devote a hell of a lot of my personal time to helping people use php to do what they want. I am definately an advocate of php, contribute to open source projects and release packages which many thousands of people around the world use. I've also used many other languages and can see advantages and disadvantages to all of them; I'm not so niave or feeble minded to think that php is perfect the way it is, it's not - but it's a damn good language. c: nothing I'm suggesting would have any effect on you're php the cobol way approach, I can easily cope with the difference, can you comprehend that it wouldn't be changing any existing functionality only adding new *optional* functionality. As others have already pointed out it would simply not be feasible to change PHP so that it can be switched between dynamic typing to static typing at the flick of a switch. PHP is dynamicly typed, so either get used to it or switch to a different language. flick of a switch? I'd be suggesting fully implemented optional code. php is dynamically typed WITH type hinting on methods, this would just be type hinting on variables as well. You did not ask for type HINTING on variables, you asked for static TYPING which is a different kettle of fish. -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org why switch when a: php could have this implemented b: I'm capable of using multiple languages and picking the correct one for each scenario. c: there is a gap between dynamic and statically typed languages that php already addresses
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Stuart stut...@gmail.com wrote in message news:a5f019de0901181015g5e2db21fn2782839ab9648...@mail.gmail.com... 2009/1/18 Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:497366f5.2030...@gmail.com... Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. agreed, tone and meaning are so hard to convey using written words alone. (you did say I was feeble brained though..) Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. you think not; I know they'd raise my productivity in php somewhat and increase the scope where I can use php. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. inexperienced I am not, perfect I am not. all questions are good questions, how can things progress when nobody questions? I love the way currently php works and I'd like (and can see a need in certain circumstances for) a bit of optional functionality which would increase, yes my, productivity. I'm sure though if this can increase my productivity it can increase others as well - I'd like to hear from some of the spl_ and pdo_ devs on this, not to mention those who currently make orm's for php such as the one in symphony. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? there you go with the feeble minded again tony.. a: this wasn't a useless request, it was a request for opinions and votes. Yes, I think that any programmer who wants to change PHP so that it looks and feels more like his current language of choice simply because he cannot cope with the differences is feeble minded. And I think any participant on this list who cannot reasonably respond to perfectly reasonable suggestions In case you have forgotten what this thread is about, the OP gave a list of suggested improvements to PHP and asked for opinions. I merely gave my opinion that these improvements would be a waste of time as they would add nothing to the language (IMHO, of course). How many in this frum have expressed any support for any of these improvements? without resorting to child-like name-calling should reconsider their personal brand. Every time I see you contribute to this list you manage to lessen the respect I have for you as a person nevermind as a developer. PHP would not have the OO capabilities it has if developers hadn't compared it to other languages and said yes, that would be a useful addition. Improvements don't happen without inspiration, and definitely won't happen if people feel threatened when they make suggestions. b: I'm used to PHP, it is my one of my current primary languages and has been for a long time; I help others with both simple and complex problems on this list and devote a hell of a lot of my personal time to helping people use php to do what they want. I am definately an advocate of php, contribute to open source projects and release packages which many thousands of people around the world use. I've also used many other languages and can see advantages and disadvantages to all of them; I'm not so niave or feeble minded to think that php is perfect the way it is, it's not - but it's a damn good language. c: nothing I'm suggesting would have any effect on you're php the cobol way approach, I can easily cope with the difference, can you comprehend that it wouldn't be changing any existing functionality only adding new *optional* functionality. As others have already pointed out it would simply not be feasible to change PHP so that it can be switched
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Tony Marston wrote: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:49737051.9080...@gmail.com... Tony Marston wrote: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:497366f5.2030...@gmail.com... Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. agreed, tone and meaning are so hard to convey using written words alone. (you did say I was feeble brained though..) Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. you think not; I know they'd raise my productivity in php somewhat and increase the scope where I can use php. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. inexperienced I am not, perfect I am not. all questions are good questions, how can things progress when nobody questions? I love the way currently php works and I'd like (and can see a need in certain circumstances for) a bit of optional functionality which would increase, yes my, productivity. I'm sure though if this can increase my productivity it can increase others as well - I'd like to hear from some of the spl_ and pdo_ devs on this, not to mention those who currently make orm's for php such as the one in symphony. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? there you go with the feeble minded again tony.. a: this wasn't a useless request, it was a request for opinions and votes. Yes, I think that any programmer who wants to change PHP so that it looks and feels more like his current language of choice simply because he cannot cope with the differences is feeble minded. but tony.. PHP is my current language of choice.. If it is your language of choice the it must be better than the alernatives. So if it is better then why are you saying that it is virually unusable without the improvements that you have suggested? it's very usable tony and is beter than the alternatives (for developing server side web applications fitting most common specs [imho]); but the improvements I've suggested would make it more usable (ie allow me to use php more efficiently in even more scenarios). Been able to use php to make almost everything needed so far; but sometimes it does feel a bit hacky and sometimes I can see how a specific part of the entire app could be made better in another language). Perhaps this addresses something per jesson said as well actually. There is often a case where php suits 75% of the application while the remaning 25% would be better suited in another language; in this scenario often the two can't be seperated and thus rather than coding around the functionality lacking it would be preferable to have the limitation addressed in the language (if possible). how non confrontational was that :p! b: I'm used to PHP, it is my one of my current primary languages and has been for a long time; I help others with both simple and complex problems on this list and devote a hell of a lot of my personal time to helping people use php to do what they want. I am definately an advocate of php, contribute to open source projects and release packages which many thousands of people around the world use. I've also used many other languages and can see advantages and disadvantages to all of them; I'm not so niave or feeble minded to think that php is perfect the way it is, it's not - but it's a damn good language. c: nothing I'm suggesting would have any effect on you're php the cobol way approach, I can easily cope with the difference, can you comprehend that it wouldn't be changing any existing functionality only adding new *optional*
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Tony Marston wrote: Stuart stut...@gmail.com wrote in message news:a5f019de0901181015g5e2db21fn2782839ab9648...@mail.gmail.com... 2009/1/18 Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:497366f5.2030...@gmail.com... Tony Marston wrote: Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote in message news:49723137.2010...@bigskypenguin.com... Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Saying that someone's ideas are absolute rubbish is not an insult. Calling him a moron would be, but I did not. agreed, tone and meaning are so hard to convey using written words alone. (you did say I was feeble brained though..) Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. And you think that his ideas for changing PHP to suit his particular programming style would be productive? I think not. you think not; I know they'd raise my productivity in php somewhat and increase the scope where I can use php. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, What makes you think that he is an inexperienced programmer? What makes you think that these are good questions? He is saying that he doesn't like the way that PHP works and wants it changed to suit his personal needs. inexperienced I am not, perfect I am not. all questions are good questions, how can things progress when nobody questions? I love the way currently php works and I'd like (and can see a need in certain circumstances for) a bit of optional functionality which would increase, yes my, productivity. I'm sure though if this can increase my productivity it can increase others as well - I'd like to hear from some of the spl_ and pdo_ devs on this, not to mention those who currently make orm's for php such as the one in symphony. lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. If it stops feeble minded people from filling this forum with useless requests then surely that's a good thing? Personally I'm sick and tired from reading posts such as this which say I'm used to language X, and my feeble brain cannot cope with the differences, so why can't PHP be changed to behave like language X? there you go with the feeble minded again tony.. a: this wasn't a useless request, it was a request for opinions and votes. Yes, I think that any programmer who wants to change PHP so that it looks and feels more like his current language of choice simply because he cannot cope with the differences is feeble minded. And I think any participant on this list who cannot reasonably respond to perfectly reasonable suggestions In case you have forgotten what this thread is about, the OP gave a list of suggested improvements to PHP and asked for opinions. I merely gave my opinion that these improvements would be a waste of time as they would add nothing to the language (IMHO, of course). How many in this frum have expressed any support for any of these improvements? you know; other than type hinting of primatives and the ability to type hint that a method argument - no they haven't; which has actually really suprised me tbh - I was just thinking if I compeltely renamed and simplified the post what the outcome would be.. I think it may be suprising, people can be very fickle over terminology (and change). without resorting to child-like name-calling should reconsider their personal brand. Every time I see you contribute to this list you manage to lessen the respect I have for you as a person nevermind as a developer. PHP would not have the OO capabilities it has if developers hadn't compared it to other languages and said yes, that would be a useful addition. Improvements don't happen without inspiration, and definitely won't happen if people feel threatened when they make suggestions. b: I'm used to PHP, it is my one of my current primary languages and has been for a long time; I help others with both simple and complex problems on this list and devote a hell of a lot of my personal time to helping people use php to do what they want. I am definately an advocate of php, contribute to open source projects and release packages which many thousands of people around the world use. I've also used many other languages and can see advantages and disadvantages to all of them; I'm not so niave or feeble minded to think that php is perfect the way it is, it's not - but it's a damn good language. c: nothing I'm suggesting would have any effect on
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
2009/1/18 Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk: In case you have forgotten what this thread is about, the OP gave a list of suggested improvements to PHP and asked for opinions. I merely gave my opinion that these improvements would be a waste of time as they would add nothing to the language (IMHO, of course). How many in this frum have expressed any support for any of these improvements? That's not the point. You attacked the suggester not the suggestions. That's all I'm trying to point out. There's a way to disagree in a reasonable manner. not be feasible covers loss of performance, loss of BC and a whole bunch of other issues. If the cost of implementing your improvements is not worth the dubious benefit then why should they considered? Without adequate investigation or comment from people who actually know about this stuff it's impossible to say whether the costs are too great to make them acceptable against the benefits. OO had a massive negative effect on performance, but it still happened because the benefits greatly outweighed the costs. IMHO all ideas should be properly considered, regardless of my gut reaction to them. As far as your if I can do it why can't you comment goes, I don't think anything has been said that would imply Nathan is not just as capable of developing complex systems as you think you are. He has expressed a wish for some additional features in PHP because he's used other languages with those features and he likes them. Does this mean he's inexperienced or incapable? No, and it's a shame you can't see past the end of your superiority complex and acknowledge that. I never said that I am superior, just that the lack of these requested features has not stopped me, or many other PHP programmers I would imagine, from writing large, complex applications with PHP. I have used many languages in my 35+ year career, and I am far more productive with PHP than I have been with all the others. People rarely say they're superior, but that opinion often comes across in the way they interact with others. I don't care how long your career has been, there's a way to productively deal with other people. Coming back to the OO example, a lot of us got a lot done before that came along, but that didn't make it any less welcome when it arrived, and someone had to take the first step and suggest it. Attack people for making suggestions and you'll quickly lose a valuable source of ideas. I'm done with this now as you're clearly set in your ways and it's not adding value to the discussion. Nathan: I see you've taken this over to the internals list. I wish you luck with your suggestions. Keep 'em coming. -Stuart -- http://stut.net/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Stuart stut...@gmail.com wrote in message news:a5f019de0901181322i2a4cbfaam4d36eff843f42...@mail.gmail.com... 2009/1/18 Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk: In case you have forgotten what this thread is about, the OP gave a list of suggested improvements to PHP and asked for opinions. I merely gave my opinion that these improvements would be a waste of time as they would add nothing to the language (IMHO, of course). How many in this frum have expressed any support for any of these improvements? That's not the point. You attacked the suggester not the suggestions. That's all I'm trying to point out. There's a way to disagree in a reasonable manner. Anybody who suggests that PHP be changed from dynamic typing to static typing is feeble minded, one brick short of a full load, one sandwich short of a picnic, off his trolley, talking out of the wrong end of his alimentary canal, etc, etc. In my humble opinion, of course. not be feasible covers loss of performance, loss of BC and a whole bunch of other issues. If the cost of implementing your improvements is not worth the dubious benefit then why should they considered? Without adequate investigation or comment from people who actually know about this stuff it's impossible to say whether the costs are too great to make them acceptable against the benefits. OO had a massive negative effect on performance, but it still happened because the benefits greatly outweighed the costs. IMHO all ideas should be properly considered, regardless of my gut reaction to them. Statuic typing is unworthy of consideration in a language whch has made its bones from being dynamically typed. In my humble opinion, of course. -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org As far as your if I can do it why can't you comment goes, I don't think anything has been said that would imply Nathan is not just as capable of developing complex systems as you think you are. He has expressed a wish for some additional features in PHP because he's used other languages with those features and he likes them. Does this mean he's inexperienced or incapable? No, and it's a shame you can't see past the end of your superiority complex and acknowledge that. I never said that I am superior, just that the lack of these requested features has not stopped me, or many other PHP programmers I would imagine, from writing large, complex applications with PHP. I have used many languages in my 35+ year career, and I am far more productive with PHP than I have been with all the others. People rarely say they're superior, but that opinion often comes across in the way they interact with others. I don't care how long your career has been, there's a way to productively deal with other people. Coming back to the OO example, a lot of us got a lot done before that came along, but that didn't make it any less welcome when it arrived, and someone had to take the first step and suggest it. Attack people for making suggestions and you'll quickly lose a valuable source of ideas. I'm done with this now as you're clearly set in your ways and it's not adding value to the discussion. Nathan: I see you've taken this over to the internals list. I wish you luck with your suggestions. Keep 'em coming. -Stuart -- http://stut.net/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Tony Marston wrote: Stuart stut...@gmail.com wrote in message news:a5f019de0901181322i2a4cbfaam4d36eff843f42...@mail.gmail.com... 2009/1/18 Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk: In case you have forgotten what this thread is about, the OP gave a list of suggested improvements to PHP and asked for opinions. I merely gave my opinion that these improvements would be a waste of time as they would add nothing to the language (IMHO, of course). How many in this frum have expressed any support for any of these improvements? That's not the point. You attacked the suggester not the suggestions. That's all I'm trying to point out. There's a way to disagree in a reasonable manner. Anybody who suggests that PHP be changed from dynamic typing to static typing is feeble minded, one brick short of a full load, one sandwich short of a picnic, off his trolley, talking out of the wrong end of his alimentary canal, etc, etc. In my humble opinion, of course. luckily.. nobody suggested that and the only person who came close was tony himself :D perhaps the phrase optional type hinting of variables and class properties is more appropriate ;) not be feasible covers loss of performance, loss of BC and a whole bunch of other issues. If the cost of implementing your improvements is not worth the dubious benefit then why should they considered? Without adequate investigation or comment from people who actually know about this stuff it's impossible to say whether the costs are too great to make them acceptable against the benefits. OO had a massive negative effect on performance, but it still happened because the benefits greatly outweighed the costs. IMHO all ideas should be properly considered, regardless of my gut reaction to them. Statuic typing is unworthy of consideration in a language whch has made its bones from being dynamically typed. In my humble opinion, of course. luckily.. nobody suggested that and the only person who came close was tony himself :D perhaps the phrase optional type hinting of variables and class properties is more appropriate ;) ground hog day! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:4973b738.3010...@gmail.com... Tony Marston wrote: Stuart stut...@gmail.com wrote in message news:a5f019de0901181322i2a4cbfaam4d36eff843f42...@mail.gmail.com... 2009/1/18 Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk: In case you have forgotten what this thread is about, the OP gave a list of suggested improvements to PHP and asked for opinions. I merely gave my opinion that these improvements would be a waste of time as they would add nothing to the language (IMHO, of course). How many in this frum have expressed any support for any of these improvements? That's not the point. You attacked the suggester not the suggestions. That's all I'm trying to point out. There's a way to disagree in a reasonable manner. Anybody who suggests that PHP be changed from dynamic typing to static typing is feeble minded, one brick short of a full load, one sandwich short of a picnic, off his trolley, talking out of the wrong end of his alimentary canal, etc, etc. In my humble opinion, of course. luckily.. nobody suggested that You suggested that. You original post specifically said static typing and not type hinting. There is a BIG difference. -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org and the only person who came close was tony himself :D perhaps the phrase optional type hinting of variables and class properties is more appropriate ;) not be feasible covers loss of performance, loss of BC and a whole bunch of other issues. If the cost of implementing your improvements is not worth the dubious benefit then why should they considered? Without adequate investigation or comment from people who actually know about this stuff it's impossible to say whether the costs are too great to make them acceptable against the benefits. OO had a massive negative effect on performance, but it still happened because the benefits greatly outweighed the costs. IMHO all ideas should be properly considered, regardless of my gut reaction to them. Statuic typing is unworthy of consideration in a language whch has made its bones from being dynamically typed. In my humble opinion, of course. luckily.. nobody suggested that and the only person who came close was tony himself :D perhaps the phrase optional type hinting of variables and class properties is more appropriate ;) ground hog day! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message news:88.0b.41390.8f512...@pb1.pair.com... Afternoon all, I'd love to get some votes from my fellow developers on the following, and indeed some opinions (especially from those who disagree). Recently I've been running in to a lot of frustrations with PHP when dealing with Classes and Objects. Personally I strongly feel that these need added in to PHP 6, for multiple reasons. I don't think the scope of this discussion covers the syntax of any implementation, just if it needs implemented or not. a: Optional Static Typing I'm finding an ever increasingly need to be able to staticly type properties, parameters, return types etc (in classes) I know there is type hinting but it's just not enough to do what one needs. Additionally support for staticly typing primatives. Here's an example: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. b: Object superclass A base class type which all objects automagically extend, with (if nothing else) a unique id / hashcode for each object (much like the Java Object class). Failing this some form of function to get a unique reference string for any variable. Example Why should each class automaticaly extend a base class? For what purpose? For what benefit? I can achieve what I want without this *feature*, so I don't need it. Why does each object need a unique id/hashcode? I have been using objects for years without this so it is not necessary, and does not provide any additional functionality. Why do you need a unique reference string for each variable? WTF! c: Method overloading TBH it's something I could live without, whereas a/b aren't, but it would be an ideal addition to php? PHP does not need method overloading as is found in other languages as it has optional parameters with defaults. It is also possible to cast each parameter into wahetever type is necessary. It achieves the same result but using a different method. Thoughts, Opinions, Votes? would love to hear from you guys on this Regards! Absolute rubbish! You have obviously been used to a different language and have recently moved to PHP, but cannot get used to the fact that it *IS* a different language, therefore it has different syntax and achieves similar things in different ways. If your feeble brain can't handle the differences then I suggest you stick with your previous language and LEAVE PHP ALONE! That's just my opinion, of course. -- 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
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. It's NOT just so we can blast each other and show off our highly dubiously assumed superiority. With all the frustrations we put up with in our daily lives, I would hope a list like this, especially since we are among colleagues, could be a place we could at least cautiously expect to be treated with respect. -- Skip Evans Big Sky Penguin, LLC 503 S Baldwin St, #1 Madison WI 53703 608.250.2720 http://bigskypenguin.com Those of you who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. -- Kurt Vonnegut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Well, since Nathan asked especially for the opinions of those who would disagree with him, I thought all was well On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 13:33, Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk wrote: If your feeble brain can't handle the differences then I suggest you stick with your previous language and LEAVE PHP ALONE! until this line. Can't quite tell if it's a joke or what it was. Kinda' killed the validity of the rest of the message. -- /Daniel P. Brown daniel.br...@parasane.net || danbr...@php.net http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/ Unadvertised dedicated server deals, too low to print - email me to find out! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Skip Evans schreef: Wow, Tony, do you think in the future you could try to express yourself with just a bit more civility and in a less condescending tone? going on past experience ... I doubt it. Nathan expressed some thoughts he had, politely, and when out of his way to come across in a non-critical and non-confrontational manner. Yeah, Nate's one of the good guys ... even though his idea's suck ;-) Tony Marston wrote: Absolute rubbish! There's just no need to insult other list members like this. You haven't been doing this very long have you? :-P Frankly, it's this kind of treatment that make these lists less productive than they could be. It intimidates less experienced programmers from asking good questions, lest they get treated the way Nathan was. And isn't helping out less experienced coders one of the reasons this list exists? There's me thinking it was for comic relief and the occasional pissing contest. must make a mental note of the above. And it also makes others less inclined to participate, or drop off the list entirely. sometimes that's a good thing ... booing Crayon off stage was a community service if you ask me. It's NOT just so we can blast each other and show off our highly dubiously assumed superiority. If I was Robbert Cummings I'd nail you on your grammar at this point, I don't want to steal his thunder so I won't. With all the frustrations we put up with in our daily lives, I would hope a list like this, especially since we are among colleagues, could be a place we could at least cautiously expect to be treated with respect. Paris Hilton because it's everything to do with hope and just as likely to happen. PS - nothing serious about this mail, except maybe the first line, judge for youself :-) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Daniel Brown schreef: Well, since Nathan asked especially for the opinions of those who would disagree with him, I thought all was well On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 13:33, Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk wrote: If your feeble brain can't handle the differences then I suggest you stick with your previous language and LEAVE PHP ALONE! until this line. Can't quite tell if it's a joke or what it was. Kinda' killed the validity of the rest of the message. I guess it's the old adage: it's not what you say, it's the way that you say it It's a pity his brain is wired directly to his arse, as opposed to his mouth, because I believe his brain is actually quite sharp ... unfortunately it all comes out covered in . PS - I must be bored, I've sent more posts in the last ten minutes than I have in the last 6 months ;) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Tony Marston wrote: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. +1 /Per Jessen, Zürich -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote: Well, since Nathan asked especially for the opinions of those who would disagree with him, I thought all was well On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 13:33, Tony Marston t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk wrote: If your feeble brain can't handle the differences then I suggest you stick with your previous language and LEAVE PHP ALONE! until this line. Can't quite tell if it's a joke or what it was. Kinda' killed the validity of the rest of the message. Yea even I thought feeble was a bit over the top. ;) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Tony Marston wrote:
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message
a: Optional Static Typing
I'm finding an ever increasingly need to be able to staticly type
properties, parameters, return types etc (in classes) I know there is type
hinting but it's just not enough to do what one needs. Additionally
support for staticly typing primatives. Here's an example:
If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP,
and don't try to change PHP to match your needs.
why not? php fills 95% of my needs in most instances, I'm as much a
valid user of php as you and php *could* change to fit my needs and
others, not without some appreciated work mind you, but it could (and
without affecting anybody else in this case)
it's a simple need: if I can type that my variable can only contain an
int, then I know it's always an int without tonnes of checks to check it
actually contains an int / is getting set with an int throughout the
rest of the app (especially when multiple dev's are working on it).
additionally this functionality would open the door to the creation of a
lot more apps and frameworks, not least the ability to create decent
ORM's. Further, it would allow people to contribute proper developers
classes that can be re-used time and time again (for instance a full set
of collections [class, hashmap, map, list, set etc etc]). Once they're
made and open source we all benefit, not only that but they could be
made by users instead of the internals team ;)
b: Object superclass
A base class type which all objects automagically extend, with (if nothing
else) a unique id / hashcode for each object (much like the Java Object
class). Failing this some form of function to get a unique reference
string for any variable. Example
Why should each class automaticaly extend a base class? For what purpose?
For what benefit? I can achieve what I want without this *feature*, so I
don't need it.
2 reasons:
1: it would allow all objects to have this uniqueid/hashcode i need
2: it would allow one to type hint Object in methods (you currently
can't) - you can method(array $var) but not method(object $var) see:
?php
class Example {
public function someMethod(object $arg0) {
}
}
$e = new Example();
$e-someMethod( (object)'y' );
?
returns: Catchable fatal error: Argument 1 passed to
Example::someMethod() must be an instance of object
Why does each object need a unique id/hashcode? I have been using objects
for years without this so it is not necessary, and does not provide any
additional functionality.
for comparison of equality, so you can make indexed arrays quickly using
the hashcode (you know like a hash table) so you can quickly tell the
difference between two instances of the same object with the same values
that are infact different, makes persisting data a 100 times easier...
Why do you need a unique reference string for each variable? WTF!
well because $a = 's'; $b = 's'; both are unique, internally php must
hold a reference of some sort to each variable and where it's stored
that is entirely unique; it would simply be a case of exposing this
functionality /or/ adding functionality based on this.
c: Method overloading
TBH it's something I could live without, whereas a/b aren't, but it would
be an ideal addition to php?
PHP does not need method overloading as is found in other languages as it
has optional parameters with defaults. It is also possible to cast each
parameter into wahetever type is necessary. It achieves the same result but
using a different method.
the same functionality can be achieved, however not without a lot of
additional code to test variable types using conditional blocks with
lots of is_ and instanceof comparisons; adding method overloading is by
no means needed but would majorly simplify the code of scripts which
need this functionality.
Absolute rubbish! You have obviously been used to a different language and
have recently moved to PHP, but cannot get used to the fact that it *IS* a
different language, therefore it has different syntax and achieves similar
things in different ways. If your feeble brain can't handle the differences
then I suggest you stick with your previous language and LEAVE PHP ALONE!
actually I've been a senior php dev for 5 years and muddled along trying
to help people out on this list for a long time too - it is my primary
language, PHP always changes and the beauty of the language is that it
tries to allow people to program the way they want, hence it being both
procedural and object orientated, obviously there's a need for this
otherwise Type Hinting would never have been introduced.
PHP could easily be a one for all language and AFAIK the only major
functionality missing is static typing..? I'm not trying to knock PHP,
simply expand it's functionality and scope by having additional
*optional* functionality implemented - like namespaces, if you don't
like 'em
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Per Jessen wrote: Tony Marston wrote: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. +1 I do.. mainly Java when I need it (can you tell) point is.. Java let's me easily do 70% of what I need to PHP let's me easily do 95% of what I need to If we could get that 5% added then PHP would be perfect, not only that but me and the rest of the team at work would be able to make our multi-million pound enterprise projects in PHP instead of java; as would so many others (that can't be a bad thing for PHP) Additionally, rather sure you'd see a mass influx of people moving to php, and applications created for it - even down to design tools such as reverse and forward engineering between uml and php. ack.. there's a tonne of amazing tools and frameworks for java, and I'm sure that a vast majority of them are possible because of this static typing (from orms to web service frameworks and all in between) - am I so bad for wanting that for php and my fellow devs? :p -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham wrote: Tony Marston wrote: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. why not? Because your desired functionality is already satisfied by other programming languages. PHP is an interpreted language with all the strengths and weaknesses that come with it. A need for static or compile-time typing is a need for a different language, honestly. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham schreef:
Tony Marston wrote:
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message
a: Optional Static Typing
I'm finding an ever increasingly need to be able to staticly type
properties, parameters, return types etc (in classes) I know there is
type hinting but it's just not enough to do what one needs.
Additionally support for staticly typing primatives. Here's an example:
If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use
PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs.
why not? php fills 95% of my needs in most instances, I'm as much a
valid user of php as you and php *could* change to fit my needs and
others, not without some appreciated work mind you, but it could (and
without affecting anybody else in this case)
it's a simple need: if I can type that my variable can only contain an
int, then I know it's always an int without tonnes of checks to check it
actually contains an int / is getting set with an int throughout the
rest of the app (especially when multiple dev's are working on it).
there are other ways of tackling this, but the biggest problem is handling
the case when such a placeholder has something other than the given type
stuffed into it ... typehint currently give a fatal error, not condusive
to elegant error handling.
additionally this functionality would open the door to the creation of a
lot more apps and frameworks, not least the ability to create decent
ORM's. Further, it would allow people to contribute proper developers
classes that can be re-used time and time again (for instance a full set
of collections [class, hashmap, map, list, set etc etc]). Once they're
made and open source we all benefit, not only that but they could be
made by users instead of the internals team ;)
gotta say that I think array() covers hashmap, map and list pretty well :-P
b: Object superclass
A base class type which all objects automagically extend, with (if
nothing else) a unique id / hashcode for each object (much like the
Java Object class). Failing this some form of function to get a
unique reference string for any variable. Example
Why should each class automaticaly extend a base class? For what
purpose? For what benefit? I can achieve what I want without this
*feature*, so I don't need it.
2 reasons:
1: it would allow all objects to have this uniqueid/hashcode i need
okay ... why do you need it. I don't grok the use personally but I'd
like to hear your use case.
2: it would allow one to type hint Object in methods (you currently
can't) - you can method(array $var) but not method(object $var) see:
try this snippet on for size:
function test(stdClass $o) { var_dump($o); } $o = (object)1; test($o);
?php
class Example {
public function someMethod(object $arg0) {
}
}
$e = new Example();
$e-someMethod( (object)'y' );
?
returns: Catchable fatal error: Argument 1 passed to
Example::someMethod() must be an instance of object
here in lies a big problem, it would involve a *major* change to
the way php works because you effectively would have to have the
engine start throwing exceptions ... that's unprecendented and
will most definitely break BC. not too mention there is a general
stance AFAICT in internals that forcing people to use exceptions
is a no-no.
Why does each object need a unique id/hashcode? I have been using
objects for years without this so it is not necessary, and does not
provide any additional functionality.
for comparison of equality, so you can make indexed arrays quickly using
the hashcode (you know like a hash table) so you can quickly tell the
difference between two instances of the same object with the same values
that are infact different, makes persisting data a 100 times easier...
Why do you need a unique reference string for each variable? WTF!
well because $a = 's'; $b = 's'; both are unique, internally php must
hold a reference of some sort to each variable and where it's stored
that is entirely unique; it would simply be a case of exposing this
functionality /or/ adding functionality based on this.
why do you need this at the userland level?
c: Method overloading
TBH it's something I could live without, whereas a/b aren't, but it
would be an ideal addition to php?
PHP does not need method overloading as is found in other languages as
it has optional parameters with defaults. It is also possible to cast
each parameter into wahetever type is necessary. It achieves the same
result but using a different method.
the same functionality can be achieved, however not without a lot of
additional code to test variable types using conditional blocks with
lots of is_ and instanceof comparisons; adding method overloading is by
no means needed but would majorly simplify the code of scripts which
need this functionality.
Absolute rubbish! You have obviously been used to a different language
and have recently moved to PHP, but cannot get used to the
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: Tony Marston wrote: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. why not? Because your desired functionality is already satisfied by other programming languages. PHP is an interpreted language with all the strengths and weaknesses that come with it. A need for static or compile-time typing is a need for a different language, honestly. /Per Jessen, Zürich why so strongly against having *optional* static typing? type hinting is already there + internal functions and classes are all staticly typed, function params, return types the whole lot. IMHO if it was to classify all the languages (specifically server side languages for web apps), PHP has 95% of the features i need, the rest come no where near, so it's the obvious candidate to get this remaining 5% that'd make it perfect and open it up to a whole set of new users and markets. Unless it's technically impossible why not? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Jochem Maas wrote:
Nathan Rixham schreef:
Tony Marston wrote:
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message
a: Optional Static Typing
I'm finding an ever increasingly need to be able to staticly type
properties, parameters, return types etc (in classes) I know there is
type hinting but it's just not enough to do what one needs.
Additionally support for staticly typing primatives. Here's an example:
If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use
PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs.
why not? php fills 95% of my needs in most instances, I'm as much a
valid user of php as you and php *could* change to fit my needs and
others, not without some appreciated work mind you, but it could (and
without affecting anybody else in this case)
it's a simple need: if I can type that my variable can only contain an
int, then I know it's always an int without tonnes of checks to check it
actually contains an int / is getting set with an int throughout the
rest of the app (especially when multiple dev's are working on it).
there are other ways of tackling this, but the biggest problem is handling
the case when such a placeholder has something other than the given type
stuffed into it ... typehint currently give a fatal error, not condusive
to elegant error handling.
a catchable fatal error which is the key here, and thats what you'd want
when statically typing; very condusive to elegantly handling using
exceptions :) further.. it's only going to be developers who get the
error (hopefully) whilst developing, so all you're doing is making sure
both yourself and other people use you're code correctly.
on something you said earlier about public properties..
currently I'll use getters and setters most of the time (with type
hinting) like you occassionally do and see the need for; purely to make
sure that my SomeClass property can't be a string(3) or something.
Adding in this static typing of class properties would save you miles of
code since:
class Example {
public bool $someflag;
}
would function identically to the current:
class Example {
public $someflag;
public function getSomeflag() {
return $this-someflag;
}
public function setSomeflag(bool $val) {
$this-someflag = $val;
}
}
I know you can't use primatives in a type hint currently but this
example perfectly illustrates how it'd both save you code, and let you
use public variables properly without worry. (i hope?)
additionally this functionality would open the door to the creation of a
lot more apps and frameworks, not least the ability to create decent
ORM's. Further, it would allow people to contribute proper developers
classes that can be re-used time and time again (for instance a full set
of collections [class, hashmap, map, list, set etc etc]). Once they're
made and open source we all benefit, not only that but they could be
made by users instead of the internals team ;)
gotta say that I think array() covers hashmap, map and list pretty well :-P
agreed (nobodies knocking php here, I'm here on the php lists asking for
features as I heart php, not over on the java forums asking for
opinions on adding a tonne of php functionality and simplicity they miss
;-)) - now yeah it covers it great, till you want you're array to only
contain instances of your User class then you've got to build a lot of
code around it to ensure this, likewise if you want you're array to only
have max 10 items in it, or only indexed / only associative, more.. but
that's enough.
b: Object superclass
A base class type which all objects automagically extend, with (if
nothing else) a unique id / hashcode for each object (much like the
Java Object class). Failing this some form of function to get a
unique reference string for any variable. Example
Why should each class automaticaly extend a base class? For what
purpose? For what benefit? I can achieve what I want without this
*feature*, so I don't need it.
2 reasons:
1: it would allow all objects to have this uniqueid/hashcode i need
okay ... why do you need it. I don't grok the use personally but I'd
like to hear your use case.
same reason one needs spl_object_hash - however coupled with 2 it seems
the ideal implementation + every object is an object so why not make
every class with a superclass of Object? it would also give a place
for future functionality common to call objects to be added and why not?
2: it would allow one to type hint Object in methods (you currently
can't) - you can method(array $var) but not method(object $var) see:
try this snippet on for size:
function test(stdClass $o) { var_dump($o); } $o = (object)1; test($o);
ahh.. you miss the point, request: I want to type hint that my function
can accept objects of any type, but not primatives/array
?php
class Example {
public function someMethod(object $arg0) {
}
}
$e = new Example();
$e-someMethod( (object)'y' );
?
returns: Catchable fatal error:
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
2009/1/17 Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com: Tony Marston wrote: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message a: Optional Static Typing I'm finding an ever increasingly need to be able to staticly type properties, parameters, return types etc (in classes) I know there is type hinting but it's just not enough to do what one needs. Additionally support for staticly typing primatives. Here's an example: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. why not? php fills 95% of my needs in most instances, I'm as much a valid user of php as you and php *could* change to fit my needs and others, not without some appreciated work mind you, but it could (and without affecting anybody else in this case) You may think it's a simple need but it has consequences for all users of PHP. You may be able to implement typed variables while still allowing untyped, but it will impact performance at the very least, probably more. it's a simple need: if I can type that my variable can only contain an int, then I know it's always an int without tonnes of checks to check it actually contains an int / is getting set with an int throughout the rest of the app (especially when multiple dev's are working on it). I would argue that what you have is a want based on your current implementation strategy, rather than a need. I've never come across any situation where static types would make my code more secure. If your code can't control what you're putting into variables then you have bigger problems than the 5% of your needs PHP doesn't meet. Any data coming from the user would need the same amount of validation regardless of whether you were stuffing it into untyped or typed variables. IMHO the same goes for any uncontrolled inputs to isolated code regardless of whether it's expected to be reused or not. additionally this functionality would open the door to the creation of a lot more apps and frameworks, not least the ability to create decent ORM's. Further, it would allow people to contribute proper developers classes that can be re-used time and time again (for instance a full set of collections [class, hashmap, map, list, set etc etc]). Once they're made and open source we all benefit, not only that but they could be made by users instead of the internals team ;) I really don't see why typed variables would make implementing anything easier or the result better. And IMHO a data structure class (hashmap, map, list, etc) would be far more useful if it could contain any type of variable rather than having to have a different subclass for each type. Or are you thinking PHP should also support templates?!! b: Object superclass A base class type which all objects automagically extend, with (if nothing else) a unique id / hashcode for each object (much like the Java Object class). Failing this some form of function to get a unique reference string for any variable. Example Why should each class automaticaly extend a base class? For what purpose? For what benefit? I can achieve what I want without this *feature*, so I don't need it. 2 reasons: 1: it would allow all objects to have this uniqueid/hashcode i need Really don't see why this is necessary. Please elaborate on why you want this? 2: it would allow one to type hint Object in methods (you currently can't) - you can method(array $var) but not method(object $var) see: snip code I mean no offence, but personally I think this is wanted by lazy programmers. It's *you* calling the function so *you* should know what you're giving it. Equally the function should validate what it's been given if it's possible it might not get what it's expecting or it will be used by idiots. Why does each object need a unique id/hashcode? I have been using objects for years without this so it is not necessary, and does not provide any additional functionality. for comparison of equality, so you can make indexed arrays quickly using the hashcode (you know like a hash table) so you can quickly tell the difference between two instances of the same object with the same values that are infact different, makes persisting data a 100 times easier... If you need this functionality why not create a member variable in the constructor containing sha1(microtime(true)). However, exposing PHP's internal ID is unlikely to cause BC issues so might be worth requesting on the internals list. It's possible there's already a way to get it, we just don't know about it. Why do you need a unique reference string for each variable? WTF! well because $a = 's'; $b = 's'; both are unique, internally php must hold a reference of some sort to each variable and where it's stored that is entirely unique; it would simply be a case of exposing this functionality /or/ adding functionality based on this. c: Method overloading TBH it's something I could live without, whereas a/b aren't, but it
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
2009/1/17 Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com: Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: Tony Marston wrote: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. why not? Because your desired functionality is already satisfied by other programming languages. PHP is an interpreted language with all the strengths and weaknesses that come with it. A need for static or compile-time typing is a need for a different language, honestly. /Per Jessen, Zürich why so strongly against having *optional* static typing? If it ain't broke don't fix it. I still fail to get why you're so strongly for them. type hinting is already there + internal functions and classes are all staticly typed, function params, return types the whole lot. Internal functions and classes are not statically typed - they check their inputs and raise errors if they're wrong, which IMHO is what all code should do. IMHO if it was to classify all the languages (specifically server side languages for web apps), PHP has 95% of the features i need, the rest come no where near, so it's the obvious candidate to get this remaining 5% that'd make it perfect and open it up to a whole set of new users and markets. Unless it's technically impossible why not? That remaining 5% is the remaining 5% for you but you can't assume that for everyone else, and it's pretty arrogant for you to think you know what everyone wants. At the end of the day PHP is open source and if there are features you think will be welcomed by the whole community you can either suggest them on the internals list, develop them yourself and submit patches or pay/convince someone else to develop them and have them submit patches. Just don't be surprised when you discover that your simple enhancements have unexpected side effects that make them anything but simple, especially when you need to maintain BC as much as possible. Also, ignore Tony... PHP won't get better without people making suggestions, even if they turn out to be impractical or unpopular, so don't ever LEAVE PHP ALONE!! ;-) -Stuart -- http://stut.net/
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Stuart wrote: 2009/1/17 Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com: Tony Marston wrote: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message a: Optional Static Typing I'm finding an ever increasingly need to be able to staticly type properties, parameters, return types etc (in classes) I know there is type hinting but it's just not enough to do what one needs. Additionally support for staticly typing primatives. Here's an example: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. why not? php fills 95% of my needs in most instances, I'm as much a valid user of php as you and php *could* change to fit my needs and others, not without some appreciated work mind you, but it could (and without affecting anybody else in this case) You may think it's a simple need but it has consequences for all users of PHP. You may be able to implement typed variables while still allowing untyped, but it will impact performance at the very least, probably more. hmm.. debatable on this one TBH, as the method signature (infact everywhere you can use static) is already getting tokenized for public static function etc so I'd assume that if a type token wasn't included then the internal code to do with it would be bypassed in any implementation; thus no performance hit at all - this is me assuming though only the internal dev's could say one way or the other for sure. it's a simple need: if I can type that my variable can only contain an int, then I know it's always an int without tonnes of checks to check it actually contains an int / is getting set with an int throughout the rest of the app (especially when multiple dev's are working on it). I would argue that what you have is a want based on your current implementation strategy, rather than a need. I've never come across any situation where static types would make my code more secure. If your code can't control what you're putting into variables then you have bigger problems than the 5% of your needs PHP doesn't meet. won't make code more secure to the outside world, but it will ensure all developers using my code use it correctly; I can currently control it using PHP however it's v complex to do correctly throughout an application compared to having static types. Any data coming from the user would need the same amount of validation regardless of whether you were stuffing it into untyped or typed variables. IMHO the same goes for any uncontrolled inputs to isolated code regardless of whether it's expected to be reused or not. from the user yup.. but this is about development and developers. additionally this functionality would open the door to the creation of a lot more apps and frameworks, not least the ability to create decent ORM's. Further, it would allow people to contribute proper developers classes that can be re-used time and time again (for instance a full set of collections [class, hashmap, map, list, set etc etc]). Once they're made and open source we all benefit, not only that but they could be made by users instead of the internals team ;) I really don't see why typed variables would make implementing anything easier or the result better. And IMHO a data structure class (hashmap, map, list, etc) would be far more useful if it could contain any type of variable rather than having to have a different subclass for each type. Or are you thinking PHP should also support templates?!! nope I'm not suggesting templates/generics (yet lol); nah not at all especially when a type could be passed through the construct; and completely agree it is useful to have classes that contain any kind of variable, and sometimes it's needed to make that subclass which can only accept a certain type. b: Object superclass A base class type which all objects automagically extend, with (if nothing else) a unique id / hashcode for each object (much like the Java Object class). Failing this some form of function to get a unique reference string for any variable. Example Why should each class automaticaly extend a base class? For what purpose? For what benefit? I can achieve what I want without this *feature*, so I don't need it. 2 reasons: 1: it would allow all objects to have this uniqueid/hashcode i need Really don't see why this is necessary. Please elaborate on why you want this? said to jochem before, same reasons spl_object_hash was created etc etc / orms, persitance etc 2: it would allow one to type hint Object in methods (you currently can't) - you can method(array $var) but not method(object $var) see: snip code I mean no offence, but personally I think this is wanted by lazy programmers. It's *you* calling the function so *you* should know what you're giving it. Equally the function should validate what it's been given if it's possible it might not get what it's expecting or it will be used by idiots. or by people working with lazy programmers.. it's *them* calling
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Stuart wrote: 2009/1/17 Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com: Per Jessen wrote: Nathan Rixham wrote: Tony Marston wrote: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. why not? Because your desired functionality is already satisfied by other programming languages. PHP is an interpreted language with all the strengths and weaknesses that come with it. A need for static or compile-time typing is a need for a different language, honestly. /Per Jessen, Zürich why so strongly against having *optional* static typing? If it ain't broke don't fix it. I still fail to get why you're so strongly for them. type hinting is already there + internal functions and classes are all staticly typed, function params, return types the whole lot. Internal functions and classes are not statically typed - they check their inputs and raise errors if they're wrong, which IMHO is what all code should do. erm need to check but gonna take you're word for it - regardless still *need* optional static types sometime please thankyou IMHO if it was to classify all the languages (specifically server side languages for web apps), PHP has 95% of the features i need, the rest come no where near, so it's the obvious candidate to get this remaining 5% that'd make it perfect and open it up to a whole set of new users and markets. Unless it's technically impossible why not? That remaining 5% is the remaining 5% for you but you can't assume that for everyone else, and it's pretty arrogant for you to think you know what everyone wants. aww man, I meant IMHO wasn't trying to be arrogant (but i do think it'd open php up to more users and markets) I do not think it'd cover everybodies needs though. At the end of the day PHP is open source and if there are features you think will be welcomed by the whole community you can either suggest them on the internals list, develop them yourself and submit patches or pay/convince someone else to develop them and have them submit patches. Just don't be surprised when you discover that your simple enhancements have unexpected side effects that make them anything but simple, especially when you need to maintain BC as much as possible. no doublt about it being complicated to implement, and honestly I'm close to learning c and doing it myself - may take a while though :p preference realistically goes to hoping some internals follow what I'm saying (*prays*) Also, ignore Tony... PHP won't get better without people making suggestions, even if they turn out to be impractical or unpopular, so don't ever LEAVE PHP ALONE!! ;-) -Stuart lol the leave php alone comment was my fav yet - and yeah impractical and unpopular sounds like a good description - dunno why I feel it would have such a vast improvement and that php would grab a big share of java's market but I do.. something about php+flex/as3 that seems to be the future to me.. keeping these two languages pretty much inline on the OO side seems like a v wise move.. time will tell :) thanks again stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Nathan Rixham schreef:
Jochem Maas wrote:
Nathan Rixham schreef:
...
try this snippet on for size:
function test(stdClass $o) { var_dump($o); } $o = (object)1; test($o);
ahh.. you miss the point, request: I want to type hint that my function
can accept objects of any type, but not primatives/array
didn't miss your point, I complete misunderstood php functionality, for
some reason I was under the impression that every object was a derivative
of stdClass ... silly me.
do think this item on your wish list is a good idea, you should be
able to typehint 'object' ... and given tat we can already typehint
'array' I see no reason that other scalar types shouldn't be typehint-able.
note that 'array' is a valid typehint (can't remember which version that
came in exactly):
php -r ' function foo(array $r) { var_dump($r); } $r = array(); foo($r);'
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
2009/1/17 Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com: Stuart wrote: 2009/1/17 Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com: Tony Marston wrote: Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message a: Optional Static Typing I'm finding an ever increasingly need to be able to staticly type properties, parameters, return types etc (in classes) I know there is type hinting but it's just not enough to do what one needs. Additionally support for staticly typing primatives. Here's an example: If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. why not? php fills 95% of my needs in most instances, I'm as much a valid user of php as you and php *could* change to fit my needs and others, not without some appreciated work mind you, but it could (and without affecting anybody else in this case) You may think it's a simple need but it has consequences for all users of PHP. You may be able to implement typed variables while still allowing untyped, but it will impact performance at the very least, probably more. hmm.. debatable on this one TBH, as the method signature (infact everywhere you can use static) is already getting tokenized for public static function etc so I'd assume that if a type token wasn't included then the internal code to do with it would be bypassed in any implementation; thus no performance hit at all - this is me assuming though only the internal dev's could say one way or the other for sure. But you've added an extra piece of information to every zval floating around the system - what type it is, if any. Huge amounts of code would need to be changed to check that value and deal with it in an appropriate way. Not a huge performance hit per variable but repeated across a large CMS or framework the effect could be pretty huge. I don't even pretend to know enough about the internals of PHP to determine stuff like that, but I've been coding long enough to recognise that everything code does takes time so the less you can have it do the better. it's a simple need: if I can type that my variable can only contain an int, then I know it's always an int without tonnes of checks to check it actually contains an int / is getting set with an int throughout the rest of the app (especially when multiple dev's are working on it). I would argue that what you have is a want based on your current implementation strategy, rather than a need. I've never come across any situation where static types would make my code more secure. If your code can't control what you're putting into variables then you have bigger problems than the 5% of your needs PHP doesn't meet. won't make code more secure to the outside world, but it will ensure all developers using my code use it correctly; I can currently control it using PHP however it's v complex to do correctly throughout an application compared to having static types. Then your functions/methods should be checking their inputs in the same way you check the inputs from users. I recall a function I wrote a while ago which allowed the first line of each function and method did something like this... check_args(func_get_args(), 'error', 'int', 'string:30', 'int:5-100', 'bool'); First argument is the array of arguments. Second it what the function should do in the case of an incorrect argument - in this case to trigger a user error. Other options here were 'warning', 'notice', 'email:u...@domain.com' and true. Most of those should be self-explanatory, and if true is passed then an error message is returned. The rest of the arguments should be one per function argument stating what's allowed. The options here were numerous and I can't remember them all, but you get the idea. This single function made validating arguments for any function or method a doddle and extremely flexible. Could your static types validate the length of a string or ensure an integer it within a range? Any data coming from the user would need the same amount of validation regardless of whether you were stuffing it into untyped or typed variables. IMHO the same goes for any uncontrolled inputs to isolated code regardless of whether it's expected to be reused or not. from the user yup.. but this is about development and developers. See my answer above - IMHO there's no difference since when you're writing code for other developers to use they are your users and should be treated as stupid and/or malicious, just like your website users. b: Object superclass A base class type which all objects automagically extend, with (if nothing else) a unique id / hashcode for each object (much like the Java Object class). Failing this some form of function to get a unique reference string for any variable. Example Why should each class automaticaly extend a base class? For what purpose? For what benefit? I can achieve what I want without this *feature*, so I don't need it. 2 reasons: 1: it would
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
Stuart wrote:
2009/1/17 Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com:
Stuart wrote:
2009/1/17 Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com:
Tony Marston wrote:
Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote in message
a: Optional Static Typing
I'm finding an ever increasingly need to be able to staticly type
properties, parameters, return types etc (in classes) I know there is
type
hinting but it's just not enough to do what one needs. Additionally
support
for staticly typing primatives. Here's an example:
If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use
PHP,
and don't try to change PHP to match your needs.
why not? php fills 95% of my needs in most instances, I'm as much a valid
user of php as you and php *could* change to fit my needs and others, not
without some appreciated work mind you, but it could (and without
affecting
anybody else in this case)
You may think it's a simple need but it has consequences for all users
of PHP. You may be able to implement typed variables while still
allowing untyped, but it will impact performance at the very least,
probably more.
hmm.. debatable on this one TBH, as the method signature (infact everywhere
you can use static) is already getting tokenized for public static function
etc so I'd assume that if a type token wasn't included then the internal
code to do with it would be bypassed in any implementation; thus no
performance hit at all - this is me assuming though only the internal dev's
could say one way or the other for sure.
But you've added an extra piece of information to every zval floating
around the system - what type it is, if any. Huge amounts of code
would need to be changed to check that value and deal with it in an
appropriate way. Not a huge performance hit per variable but repeated
across a large CMS or framework the effect could be pretty huge. I
don't even pretend to know enough about the internals of PHP to
determine stuff like that, but I've been coding long enough to
recognise that everything code does takes time so the less you can
have it do the better.
*dunno* might ask the internals..
it's a simple need: if I can type that my variable can only contain an
int,
then I know it's always an int without tonnes of checks to check it
actually
contains an int / is getting set with an int throughout the rest of the
app
(especially when multiple dev's are working on it).
I would argue that what you have is a want based on your current
implementation strategy, rather than a need. I've never come across
any situation where static types would make my code more secure. If
your code can't control what you're putting into variables then you
have bigger problems than the 5% of your needs PHP doesn't meet.
won't make code more secure to the outside world, but it will ensure all
developers using my code use it correctly; I can currently control it using
PHP however it's v complex to do correctly throughout an application
compared to having static types.
Then your functions/methods should be checking their inputs in the
same way you check the inputs from users. I recall a function I wrote
a while ago which allowed the first line of each function and method
did something like this...
check_args(func_get_args(), 'error', 'int', 'string:30', 'int:5-100', 'bool');
First argument is the array of arguments.
nice, seen similar for validating forms;
Second it what the function should do in the case of an incorrect
argument - in this case to trigger a user error. Other options here
were 'warning', 'notice', 'email:u...@domain.com' and true. Most of
those should be self-explanatory, and if true is passed then an error
message is returned.
The rest of the arguments should be one per function argument stating
what's allowed. The options here were numerous and I can't remember
them all, but you get the idea.
This single function made validating arguments for any function or
method a doddle and extremely flexible. Could your static types
validate the length of a string or ensure an integer it within a
range?
yeah to some extent; but also would be more like calling a series of
setters each one validating it's input on set so..
?php
class MaybeThisIsSlightlyMoreNameSpaceFriendlyEh {
private int $a;
private string $b;
private string $c;
private bool $d;
public function __construct(int $a, string $b, string $c, bool $d) {
$this-setProperties( $a, $b, $c, $d );
}
public function setProperties(int $a, string $b, string $c, bool $d) {
setA($a);
setB($b);
setC($c);
setD($d);
}
...
public function getB() {
return $this-b;
}
public function setB(string $b) {
if( strlen($b) !== 30 ) {
throw Exception('with some message and code or whatever');
}
$this-b = $b;
}
...
}
?
then you're validating at setter level and using the setters in the
construct / sure you follow..
incidently, if you can see the benefits of this you'll probably see the
how method overloading would be needed..
Re: [PHP] Re: Opinions / Votes Needed
2009/1/17 Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com: it's a simple need: if I can type that my variable can only contain an int, then I know it's always an int without tonnes of checks to check it actually contains an int / is getting set with an int throughout the rest of the app (especially when multiple dev's are working on it). I would argue that what you have is a want based on your current implementation strategy, rather than a need. I've never come across any situation where static types would make my code more secure. If your code can't control what you're putting into variables then you have bigger problems than the 5% of your needs PHP doesn't meet. won't make code more secure to the outside world, but it will ensure all developers using my code use it correctly; I can currently control it using PHP however it's v complex to do correctly throughout an application compared to having static types. Then your functions/methods should be checking their inputs in the same way you check the inputs from users. I recall a function I wrote a while ago which allowed the first line of each function and method did something like this... check_args(func_get_args(), 'error', 'int', 'string:30', 'int:5-100', 'bool'); First argument is the array of arguments. nice, seen similar for validating forms; Second it what the function should do in the case of an incorrect argument - in this case to trigger a user error. Other options here were 'warning', 'notice', 'email:u...@domain.com' and true. Most of those should be self-explanatory, and if true is passed then an error message is returned. The rest of the arguments should be one per function argument stating what's allowed. The options here were numerous and I can't remember them all, but you get the idea. This single function made validating arguments for any function or method a doddle and extremely flexible. Could your static types validate the length of a string or ensure an integer it within a range? yeah to some extent; but also would be more like calling a series of setters each one validating it's input on set so.. snip code then you're validating at setter level and using the setters in the construct / sure you follow.. Yes, but that's a different problem. You can't validate method arguments using setters, which is essentially the requirement you're looking to achieve. My point was that validation usually goes beyond type and getting into the habit of writing your own validation for each function/method is a good habit to get into. incidently, if you can see the benefits of this you'll probably see the how method overloading would be needed.. should be a no arg construct in there too by rights; otherwise you can't instantiate without having all vals, either that or you default all to null which you don't want in all cases. Not really. If variables are missing that's an error. And for optional arguments they'd have default values which would always validate correctly (unless you don't want them to). Any data coming from the user would need the same amount of validation regardless of whether you were stuffing it into untyped or typed variables. IMHO the same goes for any uncontrolled inputs to isolated code regardless of whether it's expected to be reused or not. from the user yup.. but this is about development and developers. See my answer above - IMHO there's no difference since when you're writing code for other developers to use they are your users and should be treated as stupid and/or malicious, just like your website users. i try to think of them like that but they don't like it; specially the other seniors (not to mention those on this list) lol I don't verbalise my opinion of the developers I work with, but I've always been a defensive coder (first real job was in the nuclear monitoring industry) so I naturally don't trust anyone else, developer or user. b: Object superclass A base class type which all objects automagically extend, with (if nothing else) a unique id / hashcode for each object (much like the Java Object class). Failing this some form of function to get a unique reference string for any variable. Example Why should each class automaticaly extend a base class? For what purpose? For what benefit? I can achieve what I want without this *feature*, so I don't need it. 2 reasons: 1: it would allow all objects to have this uniqueid/hashcode i need Really don't see why this is necessary. Please elaborate on why you want this? said to jochem before, same reasons spl_object_hash was created etc etc / orms, persitance etc IMHO an ORM should be wrapping scalar values in objects but that's probably just me. exactly! I agree completely, this is half the point, static types would allow one to make Classes for each of the scalar/primative types and have them automatically converted to there db specific value by the orm; Don't need types to do that, you
