Re: [PHP] Re: PHP frameworks
Investing your time on Zend Framework is worth it.I do mostly php development under Magento Platform, and Zend Framework becomes one of the vital skills I need.Apart from that, ZF is also a well thought Library that is a joy to work with.As one mentioned, the best part of it it gives the option to just use what you need and leave the rest stay put. I always think, only if those devs of Wordpress,Joomla etc have invested time in ZF we would have a much matured CMS systems today.I am not saying WordPress is not good, but its known to have lots of security issues due to poor framework behind it. Wasalaam, Muhsin On 07/22/2011 11:56 AM, Richard Quadling wrote: On 21 July 2011 23:56, Shawn McKenzie nos...@mckenzies.net wrote: On 07/21/2011 03:59 PM, Chris Stinemetz wrote: Hello all, I am thinking about venturing into PHP frameworks, but I would like to get advice on what the correct selection would be for someone that is about intermediate in PHP knowledge. Thank you, So, with your post you will probably get one or more replies suggesting every one of the popular frameworks and then several that suggest some lesser known ones. I think Zend looks great, but for many people (including me) it is overly complex and cumbersome. Â It is a very professional and standardised class library, but has no glue to put it all together for you. Also, it takes OOP to the extreme (for PHP anyway). Â Everything has abstract classes, interfaces and the like. CI is good from a lightweight, gives you something to build on perspective. I however prefer CakePHP. Â Its been around for a while, it can automatically build an app from just a well designed database and doesn't require configuration files in XML, YAML or what have you. Â The documentation is OK and could be much better. It really depends on what you want out of the framework. Â I would suggest going through the CakePHP and CI tutorials and seeing which one seems like a good fit for you. I use a combination of Zend Framework (Soap and Config), PEAR (for Console_CommandLine) and my own code developed along the lines of Zend Framework. I think the What framework is best question can be partially answered by asking which framework allow you the greatest degree of flexibility. I don't have to use any part of Zend that I don't want. Same with PEAR. Having said that, none of these frameworks will write your app for you. Others may, based upon various rules or file structures. -- Extra details: OSS:Gentoo Linux profile:x86 Hardware:msi geforce 8600GT asus p5k-se location:/home/muhsin language(s):C/C++,PHP,SQL,HTML Typo:40WPM url:http://www.mzalendo.net url:http://www.zanbytes.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP frameworks
On 21 July 2011 23:56, Shawn McKenzie nos...@mckenzies.net wrote: On 07/21/2011 03:59 PM, Chris Stinemetz wrote: Hello all, I am thinking about venturing into PHP frameworks, but I would like to get advice on what the correct selection would be for someone that is about intermediate in PHP knowledge. Thank you, So, with your post you will probably get one or more replies suggesting every one of the popular frameworks and then several that suggest some lesser known ones. I think Zend looks great, but for many people (including me) it is overly complex and cumbersome. It is a very professional and standardised class library, but has no glue to put it all together for you. Also, it takes OOP to the extreme (for PHP anyway). Everything has abstract classes, interfaces and the like. CI is good from a lightweight, gives you something to build on perspective. I however prefer CakePHP. Its been around for a while, it can automatically build an app from just a well designed database and doesn't require configuration files in XML, YAML or what have you. The documentation is OK and could be much better. It really depends on what you want out of the framework. I would suggest going through the CakePHP and CI tutorials and seeing which one seems like a good fit for you. I use a combination of Zend Framework (Soap and Config), PEAR (for Console_CommandLine) and my own code developed along the lines of Zend Framework. I think the What framework is best question can be partially answered by asking which framework allow you the greatest degree of flexibility. I don't have to use any part of Zend that I don't want. Same with PEAR. Having said that, none of these frameworks will write your app for you. Others may, based upon various rules or file structures. -- Richard Quadling Twitter : EE : Zend : PHPDoc @RQuadling : e-e.com/M_248814.html : bit.ly/9O8vFY : bit.ly/lFnVea -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: PHP frameworks
On 07/21/2011 03:59 PM, Chris Stinemetz wrote: Hello all, I am thinking about venturing into PHP frameworks, but I would like to get advice on what the correct selection would be for someone that is about intermediate in PHP knowledge. Thank you, So, with your post you will probably get one or more replies suggesting every one of the popular frameworks and then several that suggest some lesser known ones. I think Zend looks great, but for many people (including me) it is overly complex and cumbersome. It is a very professional and standardised class library, but has no glue to put it all together for you. Also, it takes OOP to the extreme (for PHP anyway). Everything has abstract classes, interfaces and the like. CI is good from a lightweight, gives you something to build on perspective. I however prefer CakePHP. Its been around for a while, it can automatically build an app from just a well designed database and doesn't require configuration files in XML, YAML or what have you. The documentation is OK and could be much better. It really depends on what you want out of the framework. I would suggest going through the CakePHP and CI tutorials and seeing which one seems like a good fit for you. -- Thanks! -Shawn http://www.spidean.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP frameworks
+1 for CI. If you search the group archives, a little while back I asked about micro PHP frameworks and got a ton of good replies. So folks, how'z about a PHP framework with a built-in admin interface? That would be pretty sweet. :) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP frameworks
On 7/21/2011 4:00 PM, Micky Hulse wrote: +1 for CI. If you search the group archives, a little while back I asked about micro PHP frameworks and got a ton of good replies. So folks, how'z about a PHP framework with a built-in admin interface? That would be pretty sweet. :) So, what would said admin interface allow you to administrate? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP frameworks
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Jim Lucas li...@cmsws.com wrote: So, what would said admin interface allow you to administrate? Your app models? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP frameworks
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Micky Hulse rgmi...@gmail.com wrote: Your app models? More specifically, your app model data. :) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP frameworks
On 07/21/2011 07:44 PM, Micky Hulse wrote: On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Micky Hulse rgmi...@gmail.com wrote: Your app models? More specifically, your app model data. :) A la CakePHP. Will automagically build controllers and views for the admin of your tables/models if you wish. -- Thanks! -Shawn http://www.spidean.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP frameworks
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Shawn McKenzie nos...@mckenzies.net wrote: A la CakePHP. Will automagically build controllers and views for the admin of your tables/models if you wish. Oooh, interesting! I will check out CakePHP! Thanks for tip! :) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
Probably a bit off topic and The Game is over man. Javascript coming with flank speed. Next generation JS Framworks will take html generation jobs from server side. Whole thing of Server Side MVC and other yada yada was became joke. Those server siders become JSON pushers for JS frameworks. Astrosurfing ? Yeah, just compare PHP mailing list vs Jquery Mailing list activity. And The New Game just begun... Regards Sancar -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 11:52 +0200, Sancar Saran wrote: Probably a bit off topic and The Game is over man. Javascript coming with flank speed. Next generation JS Framworks will take html generation jobs from server side. Whole thing of Server Side MVC and other yada yada was became joke. Those server siders become JSON pushers for JS frameworks. Astrosurfing ? Yeah, just compare PHP mailing list vs Jquery Mailing list activity. And The New Game just begun... Yeah, I hear C has been replaced too. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NOT! 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] Frameworks / obstinate?
On Monday 23 March 2009 12:33:58 Robert Cummings wrote: On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 11:52 +0200, Sancar Saran wrote: Probably a bit off topic and The Game is over man. Javascript coming with flank speed. Next generation JS Framworks will take html generation jobs from server side. Whole thing of Server Side MVC and other yada yada was became joke. Those server siders become JSON pushers for JS frameworks. Astrosurfing ? Yeah, just compare PHP mailing list vs Jquery Mailing list activity. And The New Game just begun... Yeah, I hear C has been replaced too. Well, I did not see you to write your web app with C. Regards -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 15:58 +0200, Sancar Saran wrote: On Monday 23 March 2009 12:33:58 Robert Cummings wrote: On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 11:52 +0200, Sancar Saran wrote: Probably a bit off topic and The Game is over man. Javascript coming with flank speed. Next generation JS Framworks will take html generation jobs from server side. Whole thing of Server Side MVC and other yada yada was became joke. Those server siders become JSON pushers for JS frameworks. Astrosurfing ? Yeah, just compare PHP mailing list vs Jquery Mailing list activity. And The New Game just begun... Yeah, I hear C has been replaced too. Well, I did not see you to write your web app with C. I write in C still. I have a mud I work on in my spare time... admittedly MUDs aren't a good example since they are dated... but this particular one shares C code, via compile-time macros, with associated PHP extensions to speed up certain aspects of data parsing and evaluation. My point is, just because new techniques and technoloigies come out, is in no way a boundary condition on an existing technology's lifespan or efficacy in any particular environment. The deprecation of usefulness of any technology is based on many more variables than Jquery - The New Game just began. Jquery runs in the browser, it will never replace server side data acquisition, caching, and manipulation. It will merely augment. Moreover, it is completely useless when JavaScript is disabled. Your post also made the assumption that PHP is used for web sites only. Many people are using it for other tasks too. Popularity is also not a useful metric of the demise of a language. It may just be that less people are familiar with JQuery and so there are more questions whereas PHP has been around long enough that the bulk of people interested in it have a good enough foundation in it that they don't need to ask questions. 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] Frameworks / obstinate?
At 10:24 AM -0400 3/23/09, Robert Cummings wrote: My point is, just because new techniques and technoloigies come out, is in no way a boundary condition on an existing technology's lifespan or efficacy in any particular environment. The deprecation of usefulness of any technology is based on many more variables than Jquery - The New Game just began. Jquery runs in the browser, it will never replace server side data acquisition, caching, and manipulation. It will merely augment. Moreover, it is completely useless when JavaScript is disabled. Your post also made the assumption that PHP is used for web sites only. Many people are using it for other tasks too. Popularity is also not a useful metric of the demise of a language. It may just be that less people are familiar with JQuery and so there are more questions whereas PHP has been around long enough that the bulk of people interested in it have a good enough foundation in it that they don't need to ask questions. Cheers, Rob. Rob: All good and excellent points. However, I have heard of new javascript being run server-side. What's the likelihood of that catching on and surpassing php? Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
2009/3/23 tedd tedd.sperl...@gmail.com: However, I have heard of new javascript being run server-side. What's the likelihood of that catching on and surpassing php? http://aptana.com/jaxer I really like the idea, but I'm yet to have a good reason to try it. If you're starting from scratch it has the advantage of limiting the skills required. Jaxar sits on top of Apache so I'm not sure what the performance is like. Either way I don't see it gaining much traction these days, at least not quickly. -Stuart -- http://stut.net/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 10:43 AM, tedd tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote: At 10:24 AM -0400 3/23/09, Robert Cummings wrote: My point is, just because new techniques and technoloigies come out, is in no way a boundary condition on an existing technology's lifespan or efficacy in any particular environment. The deprecation of usefulness of any technology is based on many more variables than Jquery - The New Game just began. Jquery runs in the browser, it will never replace server side data acquisition, caching, and manipulation. It will merely augment. Moreover, it is completely useless when JavaScript is disabled. Your post also made the assumption that PHP is used for web sites only. Many people are using it for other tasks too. Popularity is also not a useful metric of the demise of a language. It may just be that less people are familiar with JQuery and so there are more questions whereas PHP has been around long enough that the bulk of people interested in it have a good enough foundation in it that they don't need to ask questions. Cheers, Rob. Rob: All good and excellent points. However, I have heard of new javascript being run server-side. What's the likelihood of that catching on and surpassing php? Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php Tedd, JS has been running on MS servers for a long time. It was always viewes as an acceptable replacement for vbscript. -- Bastien Cat, the other other white meat
RE: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
Not to mention the Object Oriented nature of PHP. This looks like a pretty cool idea, but JS OO cannot compare to PHP OO programming. Thanks, Jesse Hazen -Original Message- From: Stuart [mailto:stut...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 7:49 AM To: tedd Cc: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate? 2009/3/23 tedd tedd.sperl...@gmail.com: However, I have heard of new javascript being run server-side. What's the likelihood of that catching on and surpassing php? http://aptana.com/jaxer I really like the idea, but I'm yet to have a good reason to try it. If you're starting from scratch it has the advantage of limiting the skills required. Jaxar sits on top of Apache so I'm not sure what the performance is like. Either way I don't see it gaining much traction these days, at least not quickly. -Stuart -- http://stut.net/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
-Original Message- From: Sancar Saran [mailto:sancar.sa...@evodot.com] Sent: 23 March 2009 11:52 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate? Probably a bit off topic and The Game is over man. Javascript coming with flank speed. Next generation JS Framworks will take html generation jobs from server side. Whole thing of Server Side MVC and other yada yada was became joke. Those server siders become JSON pushers for JS frameworks. Astrosurfing ? Yeah, just compare PHP mailing list vs Jquery Mailing list activity. And The New Game just begun... Regards Sancar -- You seem to suggest the more you do on client side the less you do on the server. Not sure where you get that from. I'm inclined to think the opposite - the more you do on the client the more you'll need to do on the server. Sure there will be certain types of client apps that will all but eliminate the need for server-side processing, but it's likely more power on the client will mean internet apps are going to be more powerful all round, both client and server side. Arno -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
Arno Kuhl wrote: -Original Message- From: Sancar Saran [mailto:sancar.sa...@evodot.com] Sent: 23 March 2009 11:52 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate? Probably a bit off topic and The Game is over man. Javascript coming with flank speed. Next generation JS Framworks will take html generation jobs from server side. Whole thing of Server Side MVC and other yada yada was became joke. Those server siders become JSON pushers for JS frameworks. Astrosurfing ? Yeah, just compare PHP mailing list vs Jquery Mailing list activity. And The New Game just begun... Regards Sancar -- You seem to suggest the more you do on client side the less you do on the server. Not sure where you get that from. I'm inclined to think the opposite - the more you do on the client the more you'll need to do on the server. Sure there will be certain types of client apps that will all but eliminate the need for server-side processing, but it's likely more power on the client will mean internet apps are going to be more powerful all round, both client and server side. Arno Yes, it's very difficult (and probably insecure) to distribute your entire database to all of the clients that might use it. Not to mention all of the libraries: image manipulation, pdf generators, etc... -- Thanks! -Shawn http://www.spidean.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Shawn McKenzie nos...@mckenzies.netwrote: Arno Kuhl wrote: -Original Message- From: Sancar Saran [mailto:sancar.sa...@evodot.com] Sent: 23 March 2009 11:52 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate? Probably a bit off topic and The Game is over man. Javascript coming with flank speed. Next generation JS Framworks will take html generation jobs from server side. Whole thing of Server Side MVC and other yada yada was became joke. Those server siders become JSON pushers for JS frameworks. Astrosurfing ? Yeah, just compare PHP mailing list vs Jquery Mailing list activity. And The New Game just begun... Regards Sancar -- You seem to suggest the more you do on client side the less you do on the server. Not sure where you get that from. I'm inclined to think the opposite - the more you do on the client the more you'll need to do on the server. Sure there will be certain types of client apps that will all but eliminate the need for server-side processing, but it's likely more power on the client will mean internet apps are going to be more powerful all round, both client and server side. Arno Yes, it's very difficult (and probably insecure) to distribute your entire database to all of the clients that might use it. Not to mention all of the libraries: image manipulation, pdf generators, etc... -- Thanks! -Shawn http://www.spidean.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php Flex is gonna be a bigger player in this than js query type manipulation -- Bastien Cat, the other other white meat
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
At 10:50 AM -0400 3/23/09, Bastien Koert wrote: Tedd, JS has been running on MS servers for a long time. It was always viewes as an acceptable replacement for vbscript. Well -- that's been my fear. I think that M$ is trying to get it's foot into this so they can charge for it -- similar to them creating C# as a alternate for Java. Has anyone taken M$ certification lately? Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:11 AM, tedd tedd.sperl...@gmail.com wrote: At 10:50 AM -0400 3/23/09, Bastien Koert wrote: Tedd, JS has been running on MS servers for a long time. It was always viewes as an acceptable replacement for vbscript. Well -- that's been my fear. I think that M$ is trying to get it's foot into this so they can charge for it -- similar to them creating C# as a alternate for Java. Has anyone taken M$ certification lately? If anything, guys, it's not going to be Javascript... it will be some other child of the ECMA standard, like ActionScript (which interfaces natively with XML, MXML, and Flash). As for Microsoft and JS, I think they're finally warming up (a bit) to the Open Source initiative: jQuery will be included (AS-IS, WITHOUT MODIFICATION) in the new versions of not only the .NET framework, but in code completion and documentation for the next Visual Studio developer package. I'm not so sure that C# was a replacement for Java, either--more a way to bring C++ (OOP) into the .NET framework while maintaining their new dynamic of safe vs. unsafe code, etc... Related to server-side Javascript... there are MANY languages that offer JS connectors so that JS can be embedded as a scripting language in your application. I'm sure this has been applied to a web application as well as console apps (in lieu of Lua, VBScript, etc.). My 2c. -- // Todd -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 10:43 -0400, tedd wrote: At 10:24 AM -0400 3/23/09, Robert Cummings wrote: My point is, just because new techniques and technoloigies come out, is in no way a boundary condition on an existing technology's lifespan or efficacy in any particular environment. The deprecation of usefulness of any technology is based on many more variables than Jquery - The New Game just began. Jquery runs in the browser, it will never replace server side data acquisition, caching, and manipulation. It will merely augment. Moreover, it is completely useless when JavaScript is disabled. Your post also made the assumption that PHP is used for web sites only. Many people are using it for other tasks too. Popularity is also not a useful metric of the demise of a language. It may just be that less people are familiar with JQuery and so there are more questions whereas PHP has been around long enough that the bulk of people interested in it have a good enough foundation in it that they don't need to ask questions. Cheers, Rob. Rob: All good and excellent points. However, I have heard of new javascript being run server-side. What's the likelihood of that catching on and surpassing php? If I recall correctly Netscape originally developed JavaScript to run server side. 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] Frameworks / obstinate?
On Monday 23 March 2009 16:24:55 Robert Cummings wrote: On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 15:58 +0200, Sancar Saran wrote: On Monday 23 March 2009 12:33:58 Robert Cummings wrote: On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 11:52 +0200, Sancar Saran wrote: Probably a bit off topic and The Game is over man. Javascript coming with flank speed. Next generation JS Framworks will take html generation jobs from server side. Whole thing of Server Side MVC and other yada yada was became joke. Those server siders become JSON pushers for JS frameworks. Astrosurfing ? Yeah, just compare PHP mailing list vs Jquery Mailing list activity. And The New Game just begun... Yeah, I hear C has been replaced too. Well, I did not see you to write your web app with C. I write in C still. I have a mud I work on in my spare time... admittedly MUDs aren't a good example since they are dated... but this particular one shares C code, via compile-time macros, with associated PHP extensions to speed up certain aspects of data parsing and evaluation. My point is, just because new techniques and technoloigies come out, is in no way a boundary condition on an existing technology's lifespan or efficacy in any particular environment. The deprecation of usefulness of any technology is based on many more variables than Jquery - The New Game just began. Jquery runs in the browser, it will never replace server side data acquisition, caching, and manipulation. It will merely augment. Moreover, it is completely useless when JavaScript is disabled. Your post also made the assumption that PHP is used for web sites only. Many people are using it for other tasks too. Popularity is also not a useful metric of the demise of a language. It may just be that less people are familiar with JQuery and so there are more questions whereas PHP has been around long enough that the bulk of people interested in it have a good enough foundation in it that they don't need to ask questions. Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP Well nice :), I wish to able to write C stuff for boosting PHP performance by myself too... And of course, no body will replace C or PHP. And there where a but and very big BUT. When those dynamic web thing begin to appear there where programming language named PERL. And yes it was still aroud here and Slashdot still running perl based code. BUT momentum was lost. No body expect to some ground breaking thing from PERL 6. And Server side become less interesting day by day. Collect request values, generate HTML output and push. Each new server side language or framework do same thing, this way or that way. Web Programming momentum shifting from server side to Javascript. So tellme your last PHP vs Someting else dynamic web language flamewar ? Currently JS guys are busying with fancy effects, browser behavior fix, menus, dom manuplation etc. When they fix things, their next step was content management or someting like that frameworks. Anywhow we well see. PS: Is there any shorh way to learn do someting for PHP with C (My C knowladge was 0) Regards Sancar -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
From: Daniel Kolbo P.P.P.S. What might be nice is to have an online repository of PHP community approved classes, then programmers could mix and match 'modules' as needed...well now I am sounding like that snake oil salesman. You mean something like CPAN over in the Perl arena? Or something more along the lines of Bob Stout's Snippets www.snippets.org? Those archives seem to have served their respective communities quite well, and would be worth emulating. However, don't limit it to classes. There are enough non-OO people that collections of usable function libraries should also be worth assembling. I would also suggest including unit test fixtures and utilities in any collection. Bob McConnell -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
Sancar Saran wrote: Probably a bit off topic and The Game is over man. Javascript coming with flank speed. Next generation JS Framworks will take html generation jobs from server side. No it won't. People are getting sick and tired of allowing third scripts to modify the DOM - browsers are becoming and will continue to become more restrictive with what JavaScript is allowed to do, and that's a good thing, because a lot of evil is done with JavaScript. Most hacks now are XSS exploits - taking advantage of the fact that users are too stupid to understand that enabling JavaScript is no different than executing e-mail attachments automatically. Just like users *and e-mail clients* wised up during the e-mail virus/worm craze of the late 90s (IE I love you etc.) - users and browsers are wising up as well. Generating your content server side is not subject to what the browser and/or user allow scripts to do client side, heavy DHTML like what some are experimenting with will go the way of the dodo bird. I suspect that in the future, perhaps not this exactly but something like this will be common place - a script node will have a new attribute, the value of which is an id that must exist in the DOM before the script is run. The script will only be allowed to modify the DOM elements that matches that id and it's children. Script nodes without that attribute won't be allowed to modify the DOM at all, and the DOM elements will have a mechanism (IE an attribute tag) that can completely protect them from modification by any script., etc. Using script to modify a document DOM will still take place, but it will be a lot more difficult, and more likely to fail due to browser/user imposed limitations. Thus creating the DOM will take place server side where it belongs. Maybe server side JavaScript will be a competitor to php in some situations, but server side page generation is not getting replaced by client side DHTML anytime soon. //just my two cents and thoughts - I'm not an expert in web tech -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
Daniel Kolbo wrote: P.P.P.S. What might be nice is to have an online repository of PHP community approved classes, then programmers could mix and match 'modules' as needed...well now I am sounding like that snake oil salesman. There is a php class web site that focuses on OO programming where members of the php community can submit and rate various classes. I've found some useful stuff there. http://www.phpclasses.org/ Most of the classes you can only download if you register, but registering is free and makes sense because class feedback should only be from registered users. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
Bob McConnell wrote: However, don't limit it to classes. There are enough non-OO people that collections of usable function libraries should also be worth assembling. I would also suggest including unit test fixtures and utilities in any collection. Bob McConnell Most functions can be wrapped in a class and probably should be for public distribution as it avoids function name clashes (though you still have class name clashes to worry about ...) If as a programmer you find a particular function nifty but don't care for the class, you can always rip it out of the class for your own use. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
Sorry for top posting, but here goes... Stopping third party js from running on the client will never happen. If so, you just killed your servers thru put in attempting to handle things like google maps, google analytics and other fun things coming out of companies like that ( google, zoho etc ). Your server will never handle a large load like that for any number of users. Using third party items ( js, images, flash and other embedded items ) is what makes the Internet so efficient. The nature of distributed systems allows the whole system to suceed. What you are describing is nothing more than poor coding and a lack of data validation, which unfortunately is endemic to many sites with lots of people being able to build stuff with GUI tools like dreamweaver. That's why it pays to hire a pro, not the teenager down the street. They don't have the basic understanding of what and what not to do, what things are dangerous to allow nor how to sanatize data to ensure that the site or the users are not gonna get screwed. Professionals, mostly, pay attention to the details that surround making a site work. It's what we get paid for. Bastien Sent from my iPod On Mar 23, 2009, at 20:24, Michael A. Peters mpet...@mac.com wrote: Sancar Saran wrote: Probably a bit off topic and The Game is over man. Javascript coming with flank speed. Next generation JS Framworks will take html generation jobs from server side. No it won't. People are getting sick and tired of allowing third scripts to modify the DOM - browsers are becoming and will continue to become more restrictive with what JavaScript is allowed to do, and that's a good thing, because a lot of evil is done with JavaScript. Most hacks now are XSS exploits - taking advantage of the fact that users are too stupid to understand that enabling JavaScript is no different than executing e-mail attachments automatically. Just like users *and e-mail clients* wised up during the e-mail virus/worm craze of the late 90s (IE I love you etc.) - users and browsers are wising up as well. Generating your content server side is not subject to what the browser and/or user allow scripts to do client side, heavy DHTML like what some are experimenting with will go the way of the dodo bird. I suspect that in the future, perhaps not this exactly but something like this will be common place - a script node will have a new attribute, the value of which is an id that must exist in the DOM before the script is run. The script will only be allowed to modify the DOM elements that matches that id and it's children. Script nodes without that attribute won't be allowed to modify the DOM at all, and the DOM elements will have a mechanism (IE an attribute tag) that can completely protect them from modification by any script., etc. Using script to modify a document DOM will still take place, but it will be a lot more difficult, and more likely to fail due to browser/ user imposed limitations. Thus creating the DOM will take place server side where it belongs. Maybe server side JavaScript will be a competitor to php in some situations, but server side page generation is not getting replaced by client side DHTML anytime soon. //just my two cents and thoughts - I'm not an expert in web tech -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
Phpster wrote: Sorry for top posting, but here goes... Stopping third party js from running on the client will never happen. If so, you just killed your servers thru put in attempting to handle things like google maps, google analytics and other fun things coming out of companies like that ( google, zoho etc ). Your server will never handle a large load like that for any number of users. I didn't say third party scripts should not be used. I did say that you will need to specify a particular part of the page the third party script is allowed to modify - both in your document (by setting an ID attribute) and in the script node that calls the third party script (by setting an attribute telling the browser what part of the DOM the script may modify) Using third party items ( js, images, flash and other embedded items ) is what makes the Internet so efficient. The nature of distributed systems allows the whole system to suceed. It also is what makes the internet dangerous when it is not done in a secure way. What you are describing is nothing more than poor coding and a lack of data validation, which unfortunately is endemic to many sites with lots of people being able to build stuff with GUI tools like dreamweaver. That's why it pays to hire a pro, not the teenager down the street. Since the internet is (and should remain) a place where anyone can publish, that kind of thing will remain - and as such, browsers out of necessity will be far more restrictive with what scripting can do and users will be a lot more paranoid about what they let scripts do. There's a reason why NoScript is one of the most popular Mozilla add-ons. As a NoScript user, I can tell you right now - you really on client side dhtml for your content, I just left your site and went somewhere else, because it didn't work for me. I *may* decide to allow scripts to execute from your domain, but if anything more is needed than that, I'll just read your page from google's cache. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks Which Have A Bake Function?
Don't forget to attach the message to the list. Regarding the frameworks, which of them, for your opinion, will take the fastest time to learn and get into code? Thanks On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Graham Christensen graham.christen...@iamgraham.net wrote: Look into Doctorine || Propel, they both will take a db structure - models. Symfony might be worth looking at, you can tell it to create a basic view/controller for them as well. Graham On Mar 22, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Nitsan Bin-Nun wrote: Hi Guys, I have been using cakephp for a while as a development framework. I'm also thinking for a while to use another framework and leave cakephp alone (too much babbling.. it takes too much time until you get to the code itself..), now I have decided to move on and here comes my question. Do you have any suggestions on frameworks which have something similar to the cakephp's bake function? (you create your database tables structure, run bake.php from ssh and kaboom! you have model/view/controller for each of the tables: insert, delete, modify, list data). I know it is possibile in ROR but never heard of any other framework or development library or anything like that in php except cakephp that gives you this functionallity. Thanks in Advance, Nitsan
Re: [PHP] Frameworks Which Have A Bake Function?
Qcodo and symfony both have an ORM layer that can do that. They will provide/return and basic set of classes that interact with those tables. Bastien Sent from my iPod On Mar 22, 2009, at 11:52, Nitsan Bin-Nun nit...@binnun.co.il wrote: Hi Guys, I have been using cakephp for a while as a development framework. I'm also thinking for a while to use another framework and leave cakephp alone (too much babbling.. it takes too much time until you get to the code itself..), now I have decided to move on and here comes my question. Do you have any suggestions on frameworks which have something similar to the cakephp's bake function? (you create your database tables structure, run bake.php from ssh and kaboom! you have model/view/controller for each of the tables: insert, delete, modify, list data). I know it is possibile in ROR but never heard of any other framework or development library or anything like that in php except cakephp that gives you this functionallity. Thanks in Advance, Nitsan -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks Which Have A Bake Function?
Nitsan Bin-Nun nit...@binnun.co.il wrote in message news:d47da0100903220910q7bb66706s6255f0fc89b98...@mail.gmail.com... Don't forget to attach the message to the list. Regarding the frameworks, which of them, for your opinion, will take the fastest time to learn and get into code? Generally speaking if something is fast to learn it is also the first to run out of steam. If it doesn't have more features than you can learn in five minutes the it doesn't have enough features to do anything useful, or with any degree of flexibility. -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org Thanks On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Graham Christensen graham.christen...@iamgraham.net wrote: Look into Doctorine || Propel, they both will take a db structure - models. Symfony might be worth looking at, you can tell it to create a basic view/controller for them as well. Graham On Mar 22, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Nitsan Bin-Nun wrote: Hi Guys, I have been using cakephp for a while as a development framework. I'm also thinking for a while to use another framework and leave cakephp alone (too much babbling.. it takes too much time until you get to the code itself..), now I have decided to move on and here comes my question. Do you have any suggestions on frameworks which have something similar to the cakephp's bake function? (you create your database tables structure, run bake.php from ssh and kaboom! you have model/view/controller for each of the tables: insert, delete, modify, list data). I know it is possibile in ROR but never heard of any other framework or development library or anything like that in php except cakephp that gives you this functionallity. Thanks in Advance, Nitsan -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
On Sun, 2009-03-22 at 10:54 -1000, Daniel Kolbo wrote: Hello, I changed the subject because I did not want to steal Nitsan's thread. I hope you started a New email and didn't just change the subject... otherwise you've hijacked the thread. I can't tell I keep threading off. There seem to be a ton of frameworks, one-click installation web applications, the latest and greatest wiz-bang applications out there. I find myself extremely reluctant to dig into these code sets. It seems when I do attempt to use one of these pre-coded applications I end up eventually wanting to modify the code outside of the original extent of the project. Invariably I get frustrated and end up wishing I initially begun the development from scratch. Employers seem to be wanting me to have experience with all kinds of 'gimicky' solutions, but I am reluctant to be constantly learning new applications (that i'd prefer to rewrite myself). Am I just being hard headed and reluctant to change, or is my stance justified? I suppose the answer is the middle-path. That is, read some new projects, take the bits I like, leave the bits I don't, etc...The problem is this isn't very marketable. But I suppose, the proof is in the pudding. What a banal way to end an email, eh? What are your thoughts in regard to these two forces: wiz-bang frameworks vs. raw php development? thanks, I have my own framework that I wrote from scratch. I still learn other frameworks to some degree. Clients don't want you writing something from scratch when you can use something off the shelf. Preferrably you can hit the ground almost running with anything put before you, and hopefully they can give you that benefit of the doubt. Do I suggest you learn all frameworks? No! But do round yourself out and show that you are flexible. Nobody wants an immovable object in front of them. 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] Frameworks / obstinate?
My personal take on this goes something like this: I'm not a huge fan of re-inventing the wheel. However, it seems that since the first stable release of PHP 5 into the wild a much needed emphasis has been placed on OOP solutions within the PHP world. Don't read me wrong, I know the importance wasn't lost on folks who already had a good programming head on their shoulders, yet, in all fairness our hands were a bit tied (and I feel that I may receive some argument here) until PHP 5 reached its first stable release. That being said, I find that quite a few of the frameworks still seem to be fledglings and a lot of the new OS projects being built on them are like wheels with some lumps. Even a few commercial projects seem to be like this. I also have a positive outlook with PHP5 and 6 and that is that this language is finally reaching maturity. It is something that I believe and hope allow for continued growth of our new projects without feeling the need to dump them like I saw with the PHP4 projects. On a final rambling note, I like some of the new frameworks I've looked into recently, like CodeIgniter, Yii even Sapphire holds some promise (have a look at the cleaner version in progress). I find myself wanting to add to them, wanting to help improve them and occasionally I too have a fleeting moment where I think How would my framework be different if I built one from scratch? Then I realize I don't have that kind of time! lol My clients are waiting. Also, I don't seem to have much trouble switching between frameworks or languages for that matter (PERL, PHP, ASP(bleh), JavaScript, ActionScript) and I guess because of that I find myself just trying to find the best solution for the clients need at hand and build from there. -Original Message- From: Daniel Kolbo [mailto:kolb0...@umn.edu] Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2009 4:54 PM To: php-general@lists.php.net Cc: Tony Marston Subject: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate? Tony Marston wrote: Nitsan Bin-Nun nit...@binnun.co.il wrote in message news:d47da0100903220910q7bb66706s6255f0fc89b98...@mail.gmail.com... Don't forget to attach the message to the list. Regarding the frameworks, which of them, for your opinion, will take the fastest time to learn and get into code? Generally speaking if something is fast to learn it is also the first to run out of steam. If it doesn't have more features than you can learn in five minutes the it doesn't have enough features to do anything useful, or with any degree of flexibility. Hello, I changed the subject because I did not want to steal Nitsan's thread. There seem to be a ton of frameworks, one-click installation web applications, the latest and greatest wiz-bang applications out there. I find myself extremely reluctant to dig into these code sets. It seems when I do attempt to use one of these pre-coded applications I end up eventually wanting to modify the code outside of the original extent of the project. Invariably I get frustrated and end up wishing I initially begun the development from scratch. Employers seem to be wanting me to have experience with all kinds of 'gimicky' solutions, but I am reluctant to be constantly learning new applications (that i'd prefer to rewrite myself). Am I just being hard headed and reluctant to change, or is my stance justified? I suppose the answer is the middle-path. That is, read some new projects, take the bits I like, leave the bits I don't, etc...The problem is this isn't very marketable. But I suppose, the proof is in the pudding. What a banal way to end an email, eh? What are your thoughts in regard to these two forces: wiz-bang frameworks vs. raw php development? thanks, __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 3953 (20090321) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 3953 (20090321) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate?
Marc Christopher Hall wrote: My personal take on this goes something like this: I'm not a huge fan of re-inventing the wheel. However, it seems that since the first stable release of PHP 5 into the wild a much needed emphasis has been placed on OOP solutions within the PHP world. Don't read me wrong, I know the importance wasn't lost on folks who already had a good programming head on their shoulders, yet, in all fairness our hands were a bit tied (and I feel that I may receive some argument here) until PHP 5 reached its first stable release. That being said, I find that quite a few of the frameworks still seem to be fledglings and a lot of the new OS projects being built on them are like wheels with some lumps. Even a few commercial projects seem to be like this. I also have a positive outlook with PHP5 and 6 and that is that this language is finally reaching maturity. It is something that I believe and hope allow for continued growth of our new projects without feeling the need to dump them like I saw with the PHP4 projects. On a final rambling note, I like some of the new frameworks I've looked into recently, like CodeIgniter, Yii even Sapphire holds some promise (have a look at the cleaner version in progress). I find myself wanting to add to them, wanting to help improve them and occasionally I too have a fleeting moment where I think How would my framework be different if I built one from scratch? Then I realize I don't have that kind of time! lol My clients are waiting. Also, I don't seem to have much trouble switching between frameworks or languages for that matter (PERL, PHP, ASP(bleh), JavaScript, ActionScript) and I guess because of that I find myself just trying to find the best solution for the clients need at hand and build from there. -Original Message- From: Daniel Kolbo [mailto:kolb0...@umn.edu] Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2009 4:54 PM To: php-general@lists.php.net Cc: Tony Marston Subject: [PHP] Frameworks / obstinate? Tony Marston wrote: Nitsan Bin-Nun nit...@binnun.co.il wrote in message news:d47da0100903220910q7bb66706s6255f0fc89b98...@mail.gmail.com... Don't forget to attach the message to the list. Regarding the frameworks, which of them, for your opinion, will take the fastest time to learn and get into code? Generally speaking if something is fast to learn it is also the first to run out of steam. If it doesn't have more features than you can learn in five minutes the it doesn't have enough features to do anything useful, or with any degree of flexibility. Hello, I changed the subject because I did not want to steal Nitsan's thread. There seem to be a ton of frameworks, one-click installation web applications, the latest and greatest wiz-bang applications out there. I find myself extremely reluctant to dig into these code sets. It seems when I do attempt to use one of these pre-coded applications I end up eventually wanting to modify the code outside of the original extent of the project. Invariably I get frustrated and end up wishing I initially begun the development from scratch. Employers seem to be wanting me to have experience with all kinds of 'gimicky' solutions, but I am reluctant to be constantly learning new applications (that i'd prefer to rewrite myself). Am I just being hard headed and reluctant to change, or is my stance justified? I suppose the answer is the middle-path. That is, read some new projects, take the bits I like, leave the bits I don't, etc...The problem is this isn't very marketable. But I suppose, the proof is in the pudding. What a banal way to end an email, eh? What are your thoughts in regard to these two forces: wiz-bang frameworks vs. raw php development? thanks, __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 3953 (20090321) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 3953 (20090321) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com Marc, Thanks for the thoughts. [quote]I find myself just trying to find the best solution for the clients need at hand and build from there.[/quote] Certainly the above is the mainstream/business approach. After all, they (businesses) need solutions today and not tomorrow. However, this is the culture that only serves to exemplify my point. All of these one-click-solutions are for today, who is looking out for tomorrow? Who is doing the long term planning? Instead of our snake oil salesmen, who is selling long term stability/flexibility. Is it even possible to make money when thinking about the long term. Is there money for the conservative visionary or is it only for the radical lose cannon. I guess I really ought to set up a web maintenance company for all of these businesses that are
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Micah Gersten news.php@micahscomputing.com wrote: Chetan Rane wrote: HI I also was looking for various frameworks and came across a very nice framework, which is feature rich as well as very fast You can see more details at http://www.yiiframework.com/ -Original Message- From: Micah Gersten [mailto:news.php@micahscomputing.com] Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 9:52 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks HallMarc Websites wrote: First time caller; long time listener.. I have been looking at various PHP MVC frameworks; Limb3, Symphony, Mojavi, Navigator, WACT, etc. I'm looking for any input anyone might have regarding which framework seems to be the most promising? I'm currently using Zend PHP Framework + Doctrine ORM. Symfony has a little better integration with Doctrine. I chose the Zend PHP Framework because of the rapid release schedule and large feature set. You might want to check the archives as this discussion has come up before. Please keep on list by hitting reply-all. Someone else already mentioned yii framework. Yes, this discussion has been hashed and rehashed more times than most of us care to think about. The only thing I have to add since the last time this came up was that I have been using CodeIgniter lately on a personal project of mine, and I find it quite pleasant. It's like Cake, only slimmer--but not lacking in important core features. Pretty quick little bugger, too, and very easy to learn. -- // Todd -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
@todd; Micah - Precisely why I presented the question anew. Not only do I not have enough time to troll through the archives; I was looking for a fresher set of responses based on today's smorgasbord. Thank you for your input; I have looked at both YII and CI and they look promising. I love the statement about PEAR! That gave me a chuckle. With PHP 5.3 around the corner and looking forward to both PHP/MySQL 6; I am ISO a framework that is just as forward looking. I have already worked with Sapphire/SilverStripe for a client of mine and I find it comes with a lot of overhead. It does seem to be a promising future contender. Thanks - Marc Measure twice and cut once. -Original Message- From: haliphax [mailto:halip...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 10:00 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Micah Gersten news.php@micahscomputing.com wrote: Chetan Rane wrote: HI I also was looking for various frameworks and came across a very nice framework, which is feature rich as well as very fast You can see more details at http://www.yiiframework.com/ -Original Message- From: Micah Gersten [mailto:news.php@micahscomputing.com] Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 9:52 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks HallMarc Websites wrote: First time caller; long time listener.. I have been looking at various PHP MVC frameworks; Limb3, Symphony, Mojavi, Navigator, WACT, etc. I'm looking for any input anyone might have regarding which framework seems to be the most promising? I'm currently using Zend PHP Framework + Doctrine ORM. Symfony has a little better integration with Doctrine. I chose the Zend PHP Framework because of the rapid release schedule and large feature set. You might want to check the archives as this discussion has come up before. Please keep on list by hitting reply-all. Someone else already mentioned yii framework. Yes, this discussion has been hashed and rehashed more times than most of us care to think about. The only thing I have to add since the last time this came up was that I have been using CodeIgniter lately on a personal project of mine, and I find it quite pleasant. It's like Cake, only slimmer--but not lacking in important core features. Pretty quick little bugger, too, and very easy to learn. -- // Todd -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 3920 (20090309) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 3920 (20090309) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Marc Christopher Hall m...@hallmarcwebsites.com wrote: @todd; Micah - Precisely why I presented the question anew. Not only do I not have enough time to troll through the archives; I was looking for a fresher set of responses based on today's smorgasbord. Thank you for your input; I have looked at both YII and CI and they look promising. I love the statement about PEAR! That gave me a chuckle. With PHP 5.3 around the corner and looking forward to both PHP/MySQL 6; I am ISO a framework that is just as forward looking. I have already worked with Sapphire/SilverStripe for a client of mine and I find it comes with a lot of overhead. It does seem to be a promising future contender. Perhaps I should have phrased it a bit more concise: This has been discussed many times--often, and RECENTLY. Anyway, since I'm already writing this, I'll say that overhead/bloat vs. productivity of the developer is a trade-off you're going to have to make for ANY of the frameworks out there. -- // Todd -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
m...@hallmarcwebsites.com wrote: @todd; Micah - Precisely why I presented the question anew. Not only do I not have enough time to troll through the archives; I was looking for a fresher set of responses based on today's smorgasbord. Thank you for your input; I have looked at both YII and CI and they look promising. I love the statement about PEAR! That gave me a chuckle. With PHP 5.3 around the corner and looking forward to both PHP/MySQL 6; I am ISO a framework that is just as forward looking. I have already worked with Sapphire/SilverStripe for a client of mine and I find it comes with a lot of overhead. It does seem to be a promising future contender. Perhaps I should have phrased it a bit more concise: This has been discussed many times--often, and RECENTLY. Anyway, since I'm already writing this, I'll say that overhead/bloat vs. productivity of the developer is a trade-off you're going to have to make for ANY of the frameworks out there. hi, all php frameworks have overheads which you don't have to worry about. those overhead codes are there to make things easy for you so you can focus on building your application. for me, the most important factor in choosing the right php framework is the size of its community. the bigger the better because there will be more people to exchange ideas with. Virgil http://www.jampmark.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
haliphax wrote: Perhaps I should have phrased it a bit more concise: This has been discussed many times--often, and RECENTLY. Anyway, since I'm already writing this, I'll say that overhead/bloat vs. productivity of the developer is a trade-off you're going to have to make for ANY of the frameworks out there. I disagree somewhat. A good framework should actually reduce bloat. It encourages you to implement proper MVC architecture, helps you avoid those rambling function.php files, and if it's well built, things like DB connectivity should already be optimised. I like CI because it does all of that fairly well, and tends to perform faster than something some coder (like myself) hacked together in the smallest time-frame possible. I use it on some pretty big sites - one with DB's with 10's of millions of records, and one site with over 1.5 million users a month. Personal thumbs up for CI, but use whatever suits your skill level, timeframe and requirements. Some frameworks will increase bloat, but sometimes that's worth it to get the project out the door in a given timeframe. If you're doing a blog on caring for chickens, throw it up in an hour with WordPress. If you're planning on being the next NY Times, WordPress will not be a kind mistress. There are down sides to CI too, but it suits my needs for the types of sites I produce. J -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Jason Norwood-Young ja...@freespeechpub.co.za wrote: haliphax wrote: Perhaps I should have phrased it a bit more concise: This has been discussed many times--often, and RECENTLY. Anyway, since I'm already writing this, I'll say that overhead/bloat vs. productivity of the developer is a trade-off you're going to have to make for ANY of the frameworks out there. I disagree somewhat. A good framework should actually reduce bloat. It encourages you to implement proper MVC architecture, helps you avoid those rambling function.php files, and if it's well built, things like DB connectivity should already be optimised. I like CI because it does all of that fairly well, and tends to perform faster than something some coder (like myself) hacked together in the smallest time-frame possible. I use it on some pretty big sites - one with DB's with 10's of millions of records, and one site with over 1.5 million users a month. Personal thumbs up for CI, but use whatever suits your skill level, timeframe and requirements. Some frameworks will increase bloat, but sometimes that's worth it to get the project out the door in a given timeframe. If you're doing a blog on caring for chickens, throw it up in an hour with WordPress. If you're planning on being the next NY Times, WordPress will not be a kind mistress. There are down sides to CI too, but it suits my needs for the types of sites I produce. Framework = Overhead (when compared to vanilla PHP). Period. I'm not saying it's overhead that will cripple your application, or that frameworks should be avoided... quite the contrary, in fact. I have recently fallen in love with CodeIgniter myself--I'm just saying that one should be at least respectfully aware of the overhead that comes hand-in-hand with a(ny) framework, and weigh those against what you feel is acceptable for your purpose. -- // Todd -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
Jason Norwood-Young wrote: haliphax wrote: Perhaps I should have phrased it a bit more concise: This has been discussed many times--often, and RECENTLY. Anyway, since I'm already writing this, I'll say that overhead/bloat vs. productivity of the developer is a trade-off you're going to have to make for ANY of the frameworks out there. I disagree somewhat. A good framework should actually reduce bloat. It encourages you to implement proper MVC architecture, helps you avoid those rambling function.php files, and if it's well built, things like DB connectivity should already be optimised. I like CI because it does all of that fairly well, and tends to perform faster than something some coder (like myself) hacked together in the smallest time-frame possible. I use it on some pretty big sites - one with DB's with 10's of millions of records, and one site with over 1.5 million users a month. Personal thumbs up for CI, but use whatever suits your skill level, timeframe and requirements. Some frameworks will increase bloat, but sometimes that's worth it to get the project out the door in a given timeframe. If you're doing a blog on caring for chickens, throw it up in an hour with WordPress. If you're planning on being the next NY Times, WordPress will not be a kind mistress. There are down sides to CI too, but it suits my needs for the types of sites I produce. J I agree with you're disagreement, a good framework will indeed reduce code bloat. fork post prong 1: *jumps on* the MVC thing, you can't just say mvc is the appropriate architecture for php applications; true many the frameworks follow the whole pythonesque MVC thing; but that doesn't make it any more the correct choice than any other architecture or design pattern. There is no fits all and all too often you see people trying to overstretch there framework of choice to something it just doesn't do and wasn't designed for (not as common as trying to fit drupal in a square hole though :p) prong 2: However IMHO there are other benefits which outweigh this: - multi other developers will be familiar with the codebase and be able to on board rapidly should the project expand - the client won't be left with some unknown codebase that only you really know (unless of course you want to tie the client in) - you learn well known re-usable code that you can take to other projects (and add to the cv) - bugs in code move from being a headache to an opportunity for improvement and benefit the community (and often fixed by others) - your code base is ever improving without you doing any work - and all the obvious stuff.. prong 3: If you're planning on being the next NY Times, WordPress will not be a kind mistress. - lol, I wish all clients understood this. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
haliphax wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Jason Norwood-Young ja...@freespeechpub.co.za wrote: haliphax wrote: Perhaps I should have phrased it a bit more concise: This has been discussed many times--often, and RECENTLY. Anyway, since I'm already writing this, I'll say that overhead/bloat vs. productivity of the developer is a trade-off you're going to have to make for ANY of the frameworks out there. I disagree somewhat. A good framework should actually reduce bloat. It encourages you to implement proper MVC architecture, helps you avoid those rambling function.php files, and if it's well built, things like DB connectivity should already be optimised. I like CI because it does all of that fairly well, and tends to perform faster than something some coder (like myself) hacked together in the smallest time-frame possible. I use it on some pretty big sites - one with DB's with 10's of millions of records, and one site with over 1.5 million users a month. Personal thumbs up for CI, but use whatever suits your skill level, timeframe and requirements. Some frameworks will increase bloat, but sometimes that's worth it to get the project out the door in a given timeframe. If you're doing a blog on caring for chickens, throw it up in an hour with WordPress. If you're planning on being the next NY Times, WordPress will not be a kind mistress. There are down sides to CI too, but it suits my needs for the types of sites I produce. Framework = Overhead (when compared to vanilla PHP). Period. I'm not saying it's overhead that will cripple your application, or that frameworks should be avoided... quite the contrary, in fact. I have recently fallen in love with CodeIgniter myself--I'm just saying that one should be at least respectfully aware of the overhead that comes hand-in-hand with a(ny) framework, and weigh those against what you feel is acceptable for your purpose. And I'm saying that using vanilla PHP sometimes (I'd say more often than not - especially with a group of developers of varying skill and experience) leads to sloppy programming, bad architecture and monolithic libraries, which in turn can lead to more overhead than simply starting with a framework. Not that a framework will save you from bad code - but it should point you in the right direction and make it obvious how you *should* do things. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
Jason Norwood-Young wrote: haliphax wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Jason Norwood-Young ja...@freespeechpub.co.za wrote: haliphax wrote: Perhaps I should have phrased it a bit more concise: This has been discussed many times--often, and RECENTLY. Anyway, since I'm already writing this, I'll say that overhead/bloat vs. productivity of the developer is a trade-off you're going to have to make for ANY of the frameworks out there. I disagree somewhat. A good framework should actually reduce bloat. It encourages you to implement proper MVC architecture, helps you avoid those rambling function.php files, and if it's well built, things like DB connectivity should already be optimised. I like CI because it does all of that fairly well, and tends to perform faster than something some coder (like myself) hacked together in the smallest time-frame possible. I use it on some pretty big sites - one with DB's with 10's of millions of records, and one site with over 1.5 million users a month. Personal thumbs up for CI, but use whatever suits your skill level, timeframe and requirements. Some frameworks will increase bloat, but sometimes that's worth it to get the project out the door in a given timeframe. If you're doing a blog on caring for chickens, throw it up in an hour with WordPress. If you're planning on being the next NY Times, WordPress will not be a kind mistress. There are down sides to CI too, but it suits my needs for the types of sites I produce. Framework = Overhead (when compared to vanilla PHP). Period. I'm not saying it's overhead that will cripple your application, or that frameworks should be avoided... quite the contrary, in fact. I have recently fallen in love with CodeIgniter myself--I'm just saying that one should be at least respectfully aware of the overhead that comes hand-in-hand with a(ny) framework, and weigh those against what you feel is acceptable for your purpose. And I'm saying that using vanilla PHP sometimes (I'd say more often than not - especially with a group of developers of varying skill and experience) leads to sloppy programming, bad architecture and monolithic libraries, which in turn can lead to more overhead than simply starting with a framework. Not that a framework will save you from bad code - but it should point you in the right direction and make it obvious how you *should* do things. that's assuming the developer actually looks at the code; all too often if they can't even be arsed learning a more robust framework then they're not going to.. I'm sure you follow. learn by example works for me though :) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote: haliphax wrote: Framework = Overhead (when compared to vanilla PHP). Period. I'm not by vanilla do you mean vanilla from lussimo? [http://getvanilla.com/] ? You know damn well I didn't. :) -- // Todd -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
haliphax wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Nathan Rixham nrix...@gmail.com wrote: haliphax wrote: Framework = Overhead (when compared to vanilla PHP). Period. I'm not by vanilla do you mean vanilla from lussimo? [http://getvanilla.com/] ? You know damn well I didn't. :) I'd love to lol - but really no I dunno what you mean but glad you said no to that one lolol vanilla-mv.googlecode.com ? or? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
HallMarc Websites wrote: First time caller; long time listener.. I have been looking at various PHP MVC frameworks; Limb3, Symphony, Mojavi, Navigator, WACT, etc. I'm looking for any input anyone might have regarding which framework seems to be the most promising? Thanks, Marc I'm currently using Zend PHP Framework + Doctrine ORM. Symfony has a little better integration with Doctrine. I chose the Zend PHP Framework because of the rapid release schedule and large feature set. You might want to check the archives as this discussion has come up before. -- Micah -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks
Chetan Rane wrote: HI I also was looking for various frameworks and came across a very nice framework, which is feature rich as well as very fast You can see more details at http://www.yiiframework.com/ Chetan Dattaram Rane | Software Engineer | Persistent Systems chetan_r...@persistent.co.in | Cell: +91 94033 66714 | Tel: +91 (0832) 30 79014 Innovation in software product design, development and delivery- www.persistentsys.com -Original Message- From: Micah Gersten [mailto:news.php@micahscomputing.com] Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 9:52 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks HallMarc Websites wrote: First time caller; long time listener.. I have been looking at various PHP MVC frameworks; Limb3, Symphony, Mojavi, Navigator, WACT, etc. I'm looking for any input anyone might have regarding which framework seems to be the most promising? Thanks, Marc I'm currently using Zend PHP Framework + Doctrine ORM. Symfony has a little better integration with Doctrine. I chose the Zend PHP Framework because of the rapid release schedule and large feature set. You might want to check the archives as this discussion has come up before. Please keep on list by hitting reply-all. Someone else already mentioned yii framework. -- Micah -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] frameworks
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Frank Stanovcak blindspot...@comcast.net wrote: Ok. I've done some reading on frameworks for PHP now, and have this question. What are some good resources for learning about the various frameworks available, and do you recomend one over another? If so why? I started using PHP before frameworks came into the picture, and then had to take my leave for a while. I'm sure this information will also help others out there who are just learning the ropes as well. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php This question is asked quite frequently. http://marc.info/?l=php-generalw=2r=1s=php+frameworkq=b -- http://www.voom.me | EFnet: #voom -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] frameworks
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Frank Stanovcak blindspot...@comcast.netwrote: Ok. I've done some reading on frameworks for PHP now, and have this question. What are some good resources for learning about the various frameworks available, and do you recomend one over another? If so why? I started using PHP before frameworks came into the picture, and then had to take my leave for a while. I'm sure this information will also help others out there who are just learning the ropes as well. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php Each of the frameworks has a site, which is the best place to learn about them... As for recommendations, it depends on what you are looking for Flexibility - Zend - you can use the pieces without needing the whole kit and kaboodle Speed - CodeIgniter seems to be the winner for now Completeness - symfony has a full ORM layer Mix of the above - cakephp Each comes with its own learning curve from easy to steep... downloaded several and play with them to work out what fits your needs -- Bastien Cat, the other other white meat
Re: [PHP] frameworks
He is right. CI is the fastest, but ZEND has awesome flexibility. I usually uses CI, just because it is written in PHP4 and in about 50% of the servers in Israel there is no PHP5 :X But I really like Zend. I will suggest the OP to download the latest CI (as far as I remember the version is 1.7.0) and try it a bit, I personally really like it but this is up to you. Don't forget to tell us what you think :P On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Bastien Koert phps...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Frank Stanovcak blindspot...@comcast.netwrote: Ok. I've done some reading on frameworks for PHP now, and have this question. What are some good resources for learning about the various frameworks available, and do you recomend one over another? If so why? I started using PHP before frameworks came into the picture, and then had to take my leave for a while. I'm sure this information will also help others out there who are just learning the ropes as well. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php Each of the frameworks has a site, which is the best place to learn about them... As for recommendations, it depends on what you are looking for Flexibility - Zend - you can use the pieces without needing the whole kit and kaboodle Speed - CodeIgniter seems to be the winner for now Completeness - symfony has a full ORM layer Mix of the above - cakephp Each comes with its own learning curve from easy to steep... downloaded several and play with them to work out what fits your needs -- Bastien Cat, the other other white meat -- ? Nitsan Bin-Nun Web Applications Developer nit...@binnun.co.il 972-52-5722039
Re: [PHP] frameworks
Nitsan Bin-Nun wrote: I usually uses CI, just because it is written in PHP4 and in about 50% of the servers in Israel there is no PHP5 :X I am just curious. Why is PHP 5 so rare there? -- 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] frameworks
If you would have drawn a graph of technological development of Israel I guess that you would have got something like a straight line with a really big inclination. People here want to start developing online when they doesn't even know the basics, most of the server administrators here installs php out of the box and don't know where to go from there, so if you, for instance, want to adjust your server software, lets say umm install ffmpeg - your administrator won't know how to do that! This is just what going on in the main stream, of course that in specific companies and in the right places this is not going on like this. The other main problem is that people are pretty much focused or in other words fixed, they are not open to changes and usually don't take others opinions. In Israel most of the servesr run centos - why? I don't really know why, my server is running ubuntu.. just like this machine.. People see that centos is working - why changing it? this thinking method is good for one hand but not that good for the other one, I don't think that thinking should be fixed and targeted but that's the way it works here so you have just got to manage ;) On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Skip Evans s...@bigskypenguin.com wrote: Nitsan Bin-Nun wrote: I usually uses CI, just because it is written in PHP4 and in about 50% of the servers in Israel there is no PHP5 :X I am just curious. Why is PHP 5 so rare there? -- 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 -- ? Nitsan Bin-Nun Web Applications Developer nit...@binnun.co.il 972-52-5722039
Re: [PHP] frameworks
Nitsan Bin-Nun wrote: In Israel most of the servesr run centos I first came across centos a few years back at a client's hosting facility and had never heard of it before, though it seems to have a large install base. I heard it's a free version of Enterprise Redhat??? Not sure, though, didn't follow up. Give me Debian or give me death! Nah,not really, I jus' LOVES my FreeBSD... but Linux is cool too, what I run on workstations. -- 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] Frameworks
On 3/12/08, Aschwin Wesselius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I'm after is a framework that is simple, solid, compact and flexible enough to extend by myself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_application_frameworks#Comparison_of_features -- Greg Donald http://destiney.com/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks
Andrés Robinet wrote: I want a framework I can plug a microphone in, and talk to it, and it does the job for me (really, I need it). But I guess we are far away from that. You need it? And what happens if you won't get it in a life time? If you need REAL RAD (a la Delphi), use VCL for PHP... you'll still have to write the event handlers (you can't save yourself from coding) and you will have to stick with Codegear (you are of those who pay for software, right?). REAL RAD? Is that an acronym or is that emphasis? But no thanks. If I've paid around 1000 dollars on software, that would be a bit much. And that must have been a decade ago. If you are looking for a flexible PHP 5 framework, where each component is more or less independent of the others, try the Zend Framework. That's what is on my list of candidates, yes. If you want a lot of features bundled into a big and fat box, and you need PHP 4 support, use CakePHP. Even the way you name database tables will be affected, but if you eat a piece of the cake you are likely to want it all anyway. Wait. PHP 4? I admit that I don't use all the OOP of PHP 5, but really I don't let myself be forced to use deprecated software if it is my income. No, I haven't touched PHP 4 like 3,5 years now. If you want a flexible and easy to use PHP 4 and PHP 5 framework and you are willing to wait more than six months for each minor release, you can use CodeIgniter. Ok, that one is of my list of candidates then. If you are rich, you can pay us (the PHP-list members) to build one for you :D. It will be a complete disaster because we'll never agree on the features, but you'll entertain yourself with our discussions for months. I think I keep that in mind when I've become rich and lonely and need some entertainment. If your IQ is greater than 150 you can try writing your own. Is IQ really relevant to being capable of writing your own framework? Ok, an IQ of 70 won't get you advanced software out of your hands. I've an IQ between 160 and 170 (lost the score along the path somewhere). But I couldn't be bothered to write my own framework just to invent some wheels to have a nice ride. It could be a challenge and might even be rewarding afterwards, but in the mean while it won't get me anywhere. So much for RAD and then writing your own framework. Must be kidding ;-) OK, thanks for your input. Some points are really helpful! Aschwin Wesselius -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Frameworks
-Original Message- From: Aschwin Wesselius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 4:14 PM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: [PHP] Frameworks Hi all, Maybe this has past the list a couple of times (just like the 'storing images in a DB' question). What I'm after is a framework that is simple, solid, compact and flexible enough to extend by myself. I'm not an OOP person. But I do use classes when I think they fit a purpose. But most of all I want a framework that has the wheels I don't want to reinvent myself but do make sense to have. Like: - Informative error-handling - DB layer, not too abstract please - Form handling - etc. What is a good framework to start with? What framework doesn't make it too complex that it says it gives you RAD but actually let's you sink in code? I don't have to develop enterprise stuff. I want to manage information for myself and maybe build a blog or whatever to play with. What let's build things quick so you can focus on things to test instead in building the surrounding elements? Again, maybe I've to dive into archives etc. But that doesn't give me answers I need I guess. Thanks in advance. Aschwin Wesselius I want a framework I can plug a microphone in, and talk to it, and it does the job for me (really, I need it). But I guess we are far away from that. If you need REAL RAD (a la Delphi), use VCL for PHP... you'll still have to write the event handlers (you can't save yourself from coding) and you will have to stick with Codegear (you are of those who pay for software, right?). If you are looking for a flexible PHP 5 framework, where each component is more or less independent of the others, try the Zend Framework. If you want a lot of features bundled into a big and fat box, and you need PHP 4 support, use CakePHP. Even the way you name database tables will be affected, but if you eat a piece of the cake you are likely to want it all anyway. If you want a flexible and easy to use PHP 4 and PHP 5 framework and you are willing to wait more than six months for each minor release, you can use CodeIgniter. If you are rich, you can pay us (the PHP-list members) to build one for you :D. It will be a complete disaster because we'll never agree on the features, but you'll entertain yourself with our discussions for months. If your IQ is greater than 150 you can try writing your own. Otherwise, ask Robert Cummings or Manuel Lemos. Regards, Rob Andrés Robinet | Lead Developer | BESTPLACE CORPORATION 5100 Bayview Drive 206, Royal Lauderdale Landings, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33308 | TEL 954-607-4296 | FAX 954-337-2695 | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | MSN Chat: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | SKYPE: bestplace | Web: bestplace.biz | Web: seo-diy.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Frameworks
-Original Message- From: Aschwin Wesselius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 5:04 PM To: Andrés Robinet Cc: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Frameworks Andrés Robinet wrote: I want a framework I can plug a microphone in, and talk to it, and it does the job for me (really, I need it). But I guess we are far away from that. You need it? And what happens if you won't get it in a life time? If you need REAL RAD (a la Delphi), use VCL for PHP... you'll still have to write the event handlers (you can't save yourself from coding) and you will have to stick with Codegear (you are of those who pay for software, right?). REAL RAD? Is that an acronym or is that emphasis? But no thanks. If I've paid around 1000 dollars on software, that would be a bit much. And that must have been a decade ago. If you are looking for a flexible PHP 5 framework, where each component is more or less independent of the others, try the Zend Framework. That's what is on my list of candidates, yes. If you want a lot of features bundled into a big and fat box, and you need PHP 4 support, use CakePHP. Even the way you name database tables will be affected, but if you eat a piece of the cake you are likely to want it all anyway. Wait. PHP 4? I admit that I don't use all the OOP of PHP 5, but really I don't let myself be forced to use deprecated software if it is my income. No, I haven't touched PHP 4 like 3,5 years now. If you want a flexible and easy to use PHP 4 and PHP 5 framework and you are willing to wait more than six months for each minor release, you can use CodeIgniter. Ok, that one is of my list of candidates then. If you are rich, you can pay us (the PHP-list members) to build one for you :D. It will be a complete disaster because we'll never agree on the features, but you'll entertain yourself with our discussions for months. I think I keep that in mind when I've become rich and lonely and need some entertainment. If your IQ is greater than 150 you can try writing your own. Is IQ really relevant to being capable of writing your own framework? Ok, an IQ of 70 won't get you advanced software out of your hands. I've an IQ between 160 and 170 (lost the score along the path somewhere). But I couldn't be bothered to write my own framework just to invent some wheels to have a nice ride. It could be a challenge and might even be rewarding afterwards, but in the mean while it won't get me anywhere. So much for RAD and then writing your own framework. Must be kidding ;-) OK, thanks for your input. Some points are really helpful! Aschwin Wesselius I'm not kidding about the *REAL RAD* thing. RAD is Rapid Application Development, and I don't think anything can be faster than dragging a button component on a *form-like* window, then double clicking on it, writing *echo Hello World!* and hit F9. There you are, you got a *Hello world* in some seconds, no need for special set up, or writing controller/model/view code whatsoever. However, I wouldn't use Delphi for PHP because it's a proprietary thing, it's a fat dog and you must pay some REAL bucks for it. And... as soon as you get more serious with what you want to do, you need to get very close with the code behind the scenes... which means you have to put much more time and effort than you would need for a *standard* MVC framework. Sorry, not something I'm willing to do for a web application. I prefer coding controllers, models and views. That's also why I'm reactive to sniff into Prado or even QCodo (which I think disserves some attention to me, because of the underlying *build system*). Compare that to a ZF component... once you learn it, you can use it wherever you want (generally), even if you are not using ZF for the MVC part (take Zend_Http_Client, Zend_Pdf as examples). Now, take CodeIgniter... I liked it because it had many *out-of-the-box* features and components. Also, some clients still had PHP 4 and I couldn't do anything about it. Dealing with it is fairly easy (don't expect cutting-edge magic out of its components though). I fell in love with rapyd http://www.rapyd.com/ which is based on CodeIgniter and simplifies most backend tasks a bunch. But now, rapyd is discontinued (the CI version at least) and we have kohanaPHP as an alternative (http://kohanaphp.com/). To make it worse, CodeIgniter took several (I think more than 6) months to upgrade from 1.5.4 to 1.6. Why? Because they rely on integrating it with their commercial *Expression Engine* product (and they even stated that in their forums). And the *framework-nightmare* started all over again for me. Wanna know what I'm planning to do? Embrace the Zend Framework, it's solid, it's powerful, it's got a company behind and it's still free. And now that PHP 4 has been discontinued, I have the perfect *excuse* to say NO to whatever project has PHP 4 for hosting... They upgrade their PHP
Re: [PHP] Frameworks
Andrés Robinet wrote: Anyway... you will get one thousand opinions about Frameworks, and 90% of them may be correct. Choose the framework you like after playing around with some examples and having an overview of the reference manual (forgot to say, documentation is really important to get you started). Regards, Rob(inet) Thanks again. I think you've set out exactly an opinion I was after. Off course it all depends on which level one has stepped in, is now and wants to be when start using a framework. I've not taken the step to build my own or tested anything as an early adoptor on any of them. But I see that RAD makes the difference nowadays. Time is money. People want more features in less time etc. If I don't get used to a framework very soon, I'm out of business. I want to do the whole thing. I want an environment that takes a lot of fuss out of my hands: - Unit testing, never done it, but sounds reasonable. - MVC, makes sense but can be interpreted over the top. - DB abstraction The environments I've been in don't switch from DB's over night, so I don't care. I wanna see my queries and where they come from, period. I don't need no fricking querybuilding stuff. - Form handling. Validation is key. Security is important, so sanitizing input must be done as early as possible. - Error handling. Get information back from your code. I need that together with Unit testing. Should save debugging time. etc. Voila, all arguments for a good framework. Zend sounds really a stable and reliable product. I'm gonna setup a testserver and see how far it goes. BTW, any people having experience with PHP UnderControl? Aschwin Wesselius -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks
I think you pegged it... the benefit is that you save time, the drawback is that you're limited in what you can do. I think you have to review each framework and chose one based on your personal preferences, the project at hand, etc. On Nov 2, 2006, at 7:37 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know this subject has been covered in the past, but my question is why use them? I'm hoping to not create a religious war... I see that frameworks would probably help you develop some things faster, but most of the time they don't do the things the way I would want them to work. If I did use one, it almost seems like I would use it to get through something until I had time to do things the way I wanted/needed to do them. There's a lot of talk about frameworks lately, and especially the Zend Framework, so I'd like to look into what it's all about. I think I might be missing out the framework issue, so I'd like to hear other people's opinions. I do like the mail, pdf, and a few other parts of the Zend Framework. I also like that it's more like a set of tools than a monolithic beast that would take a lot of memory just to load up into your application. Your thoughts? Thanks, Ray -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Frameworks
I know this subject has been covered in the past, but my question is why use them? I'm hoping to not create a religious war... I see that frameworks would probably help you develop some things faster, but most of the time they don't do the things the way I would want them to work. If I did use one, it almost seems like I would use it to get through something until I had time to do things the way I wanted/needed to do them. There's a lot of talk about frameworks lately, and especially the Zend Framework, so I'd like to look into what it's all about. I think I might be missing out the framework issue, so I'd like to hear other people's opinions. I do like the mail, pdf, and a few other parts of the Zend Framework. I also like that it's more like a set of tools than a monolithic beast that would take a lot of memory just to load up into your application. Hi Ray, Your comments reflect how I felt about frameworks for a long time: that they force you work in a certain way that often isn't suitable for the app you're building. Part of the problem was that I used to confuse customisable applications (e.g. CMS systems) with genuine abstract frameworks. For my latest app (a CRM system) I felt I should reassess what frameworks were and how they could help me - and I'm very glad I did. After reading up on all the ones I could find, I downloaded and played with Symfony, Cake and QCodo (http://www.qcodo.com). I eventually chose QCodo, primarily for its 'code generation' approach (i.e. it builds your object relational model (ORM) for you by examining the DB). I liked this because it didn't 'tie me in' - once it had created the ORM for me, I just had the classes I need to build my app from scratch. I have to say I really rate QCodo. The code it generates is really first class and VERY easy to understand/extend. Being PHP5 only, it makes full use of PHP's OO functionality. I believe that having used a framework for this project, my app is better constructed and has also been developed in about half the time it would have taken me to hand code the ORM. I'd be interested to hear the thoughts of others on the subject too. Edward -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks
I personal prefer Frameworks. I tried some of them. But in my opinion, those are not made to create application fater, no. With Frameworks, you can maintaine your application better. You have a global place where everything can be changed on one file. Ofc, its also possible that this improves the Application development, which is ofc good, but the main thing is you can maintain it easy. A good example is your comment regarding loading lot of staff into memory.. In my company we also have a bigger framework, with a lot of includes and so on. But it is still damn, fast. If you include now 100 or 1000 files, you allmost dont see it as PHP proccesses them very fast. And if you have to change for example now a filename that is required by other fiels, that a Framework is your friend as you dont have to go to each file and change the filename, no, you only have to change it on one place, result in: easy maintaining. Ofc, this is only one example, but there exists other things too where a framework can improve your work and save you time in changing things . on Thursday 02 November 2006 16:37, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know this subject has been covered in the past, but my question is why use them? I'm hoping to not create a religious war... I see that frameworks would probably help you develop some things faster, but most of the time they don't do the things the way I would want them to work. If I did use one, it almost seems like I would use it to get through something until I had time to do things the way I wanted/needed to do them. There's a lot of talk about frameworks lately, and especially the Zend Framework, so I'd like to look into what it's all about. I think I might be missing out the framework issue, so I'd like to hear other people's opinions. I do like the mail, pdf, and a few other parts of the Zend Framework. I also like that it's more like a set of tools than a monolithic beast that would take a lot of memory just to load up into your application. Your thoughts? Thanks, Ray -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know this subject has been covered in the past, but my question is why use them? it's kind of the same question as 'why use software libraries?' - which is kind of answered by 'do you want to write your own TCP/IP stack *everytime* you write a network enabled piece of software? I'm hoping to not create a religious war... I see that frameworks would probably help you develop some things faster, but most of the time they don't do the things the way I would want them to work. If I did use one, it almost seems like I would use it to get through something until I had time to do things the way I wanted/needed to do them. There's a lot of talk about frameworks lately, and especially the Zend Framework, so I'd like to look into what it's all about. I think I might be missing out the framework issue, so I'd like to hear other people's opinions. the name of the game is 'code reuse' - whether it's libs, framework, CMS or legobricks doesn't really matter. I do like the mail, pdf, and a few other parts of the Zend Framework. I also like that it's more like a set of tools than a monolithic beast that would take a lot of memory just to load up into your application. well Zend is more of a library+philosophy than a framework, a framework suggests a complete, ready to run, application development environment (which doesn't mean, by definition, that it has to be a big, slow beast) either you rewrite a menu generation function for every site you build or you develop/download/install something generic and save yourself lots of time/energy (because you no longer have to reinvent the wheel) you'll find lots of people build up a personal collection of reusable code that more often than not is partially comnprised of 3rd party code - i.e. if you like some bits of Zend just grab them, mould them and stick'em in your personal toolbox (assuming the licenses allow this) Your thoughts? I was going to write something demeaning about driving 5 liter pickup trucks as if oxygen was going out of fashion, but I've calmed down again. Thanks, Ray -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Frameworks
I am using Code Igniter on two projects at the moment and I am loving it. All the tedious, repetitive elements are reduced, security is increased and code organised in a clean fashion (you can of course mis-use frameworks but with effort they can promote and facilitate a cleaner, more modular approach to coding). In other words I get to work on the meaty part of the application without coding the tedious bits or trapsing through my own past projects to find code I can re-use. It's fast and lightweight and I highlt recommend it - codeigniter.com.
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/05/2006 11:47 PM Robert Cummings said the following: This is necessary to escape wildcards characters that should be taken literally in patterns. It is needed to implement the auto-complete feature using SQL conditions of type field LIKE 'typed-text%'. If typed-text contains % or _, it must be escaped. Some databases like MS SQL need to escape other characters too. If there was enough need for Metabase to support other layers then I'm sure the community would be submitting the code for you. But then again, you probably wouldn't accept outside code into your own codebase since that would violate your internal dislike for external code *lol*. Touché! Your obcession to diss everything I say is preventing you to see the things the way they are. You're deluding yourself as to your importance. I really don't have an obsession with you. Having had very little interaction with you in the past leaves me with a generally agnostic opinion. Furthermore I'm npt having any trouble whatsoever seeing the way things are. Perhaps you are the one having clarity trouble. If you go and read your replies to my messages throughout this thread you may notice a pattern of you trying to contradict almost everything I said. When you ended the phrase above with the word Touché, it seemed that winning the argument was very important for you. Robert, relax! I am not in this thread to compete with anyone. If expresses disagreement with me, I think to myself that since I am not a native english speaker, I may have not expressed myself clearly. Therefore, I try to explain myself better. If you still disagree after my explanations, that is ok, I will not be upset because of that. I am not making myself important. My opinion is mine, yours is yours, neither is necessarily better than the other. There is no need for manifestations of excessive joy, as if winning an argument is a big deal. That is my opinion, of course. I do not have a problem using other people's code, my problem is relying on packages that need to be evolved to address my needs but I do not control of their development. I control Metabase development, therefore there is no problem in accepting other peoples contributions of patches or even complete drivers. As a matter of fact Metabase always had many, many contributions, unlike you imagined, as you may see in the contributors roll with the respective credit for the contributed work here: http://www.meta-language.net/metabase.html#3.1.4 That's nice. So what are you complaining about? I was not complaining, remember? I was just explaining that unlike you stated, I do not have a problem with other people's code. I just would rather not rely on packages that I don't control their development, as it may cause inconvinient effects to the progress of my projects. Somehow, I explained that in my post with advice for instance, of excessive framework class interdependencies, PHP 5 dependent frameworks, frameworks developed by people that did not try them much in real world applications, etc.. From your earlier statement, he could supposedly choose a framework just from browsing the source code. At any rate, he probably wasted time reading your article that purported to recommend a framework when in fact it had nothing of substantial value to say about any particular framework. If you ever paid attention to what I wrote, my recommendation to the original poster to read the article was about giving recommendations on how to pick frameworks that suit his needs, rather than recommending any specific frameworks. I am pasting the relevant quote of my original reply so you can get a grip for once. Anyway, you may want to read this more in depth reflection of the state of the PHP framework world and recommendations on how to pick what suits best for you: http://www.phpclasses.org/blog/post/52-Recommended-PHP-frameworks.html Oh I paid perfect attention. If you read what I originally wrote you'll see that I was commenting on the article itself that you suggested since I and many others find great fault with it. For your benefit I've pasted below my original comment: I am afraid that you still do not get the point that I wrote an article that I wanted to be green, it is written in the summary that it is green, so people that do not like green do not bother reading it. Still you are complaining that the article is not red as you think it should be. What can I do for you? Nothing. Never mind. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Metastorage - Data object relational mapping layer generator http://www.metastorage.net/ PHP Classes - Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/06/2006 09:52 PM Martin Alterisio said the following: Anyway, you may want to read this more in depth reflection of the state of the PHP framework world and recommendations on how to pick what suits best for you: http://www.phpclasses.org/blog/post/52-Recommended-PHP-frameworks.html Sorry to intrude with my usual obnoxious behaviour, but this is starting to affect my self-esteem (what's left of it). Am I the only one who has a really hard time reading the blog posts in phpclasses.org? Everytime a reference to this blog is posted I lose track of the discussion, because I can't really grasp what Lemos is talking about. I'd like to make some some constructive criticism, not just to Lemos but to the community in general, since I think many of us need to improve our writing skills: 1 - Don't make lng boooring posts. This blog in reality is the site monthly announcement newsletter. Some months there is more to tell than in others. I usually put a list of contents when the post is about many subjects. Then maybe you should consider making it a _weekly_ announcement newsletter, 'cause some of those posts are really really too long to digest in only one shot. Unfortunately I do not have so much time to post site announcements that often. Anyway, this one was not an announcement. I am commited to post something at least once every month to put something interesting in the site editors newsletter. When there are new features to announce, I try to fill the space with an opinion article. Some people like it, other people are not interested. In any case, at the top of the article there is a summary of the topics in the article so anybody can figure whether there is anything of interest in the article, so they do not have to read it all the way. 2 - Get to the point. Introduction are great when they are not two pages long. I don't know what you mean by introduction. Usually there is a summary that goes in the RSS feed that is no longer than 3 or 4 paragraphs. I mean all the things you need to say before actually getting into what you want to talk about. Just take for example the post about recommend php framework, look how much you have to read before actually get any info relating directly to php frameworks. Is true that there are many things to say before about frameworks hype, but couldn't it be explained in less words? I suppose it is a matter of style. As I said, some people appreciate a more articulated style, other people prefer a more objective style like you. Actually I also prefer a more objective style when I am reading other people's articles. That is why I split the article in sections so you can jump to whatever has what matters to you. 3 - Stick to the topic. Or use appropiate titles. 4 - If the topic is inherently long, use distinguishable headers and subheaders. It's a pain in the ass to read a 5 pages long article that looks the same everywhere, with no easy way to know what is the subtopic of what are you reading now. As I said, these posts often cover many topics. It may not seem by topic sections use titles. The problem is that this newsletter posts used to go by e-mail to the site subscribers in plain text, so there was no way to format titles. I was unaware of that, I understand now. It's really a pain in the ass to format a text only email for proper reading even more if the same text has to be used in a website. Currently I no longer send the whole article by e-mail. Only the summary is sent now. These posts were being sent to near 150,000 people and that made the site spend too much bandwidth. I just did not had the time to integrate an HTML or BBCode based editor where the articles are posted to make it look better. It is on my todo list. 5 - Don't talk so much about your life! You can always make another blog for that... Unless your personal experience can bring an unique insight of the point you're trying to make. I suppose you may be talking about other peoples blogs. Personal blogs are supposed to be personal. This is the PHPClasses site blog. Usually it covers matters about the site developments and matters of interest to the site users. It does not talk about my life. It may talk about my experience when it is relevant to the post topic. Generally speaking, yes, I'm talking about other peoples blogs. I'm sick tired of all the holy crusades out there, specially when it comes to Web2.0evangelists. You may have not noticed it but somewhere here or there you let your subconcious write for you, specially on the topic of Web2.0 (I used the term twice already, please stop me before I have to pay royalties to O'reilly). It may be just an adjective, but that's all it takes to make a mildly objetive point of view turn into a completely subjective point of view. heheheh ;-) I do not have a personal blog. I do not have the time even if I
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
2006/8/4, Manuel Lemos [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hello, on 08/03/2006 05:18 PM Martin Alterisio said the following: Anyway, you may want to read this more in depth reflection of the state of the PHP framework world and recommendations on how to pick what suits best for you: http://www.phpclasses.org/blog/post/52-Recommended-PHP-frameworks.html Sorry to intrude with my usual obnoxious behaviour, but this is starting to affect my self-esteem (what's left of it). Am I the only one who has a really hard time reading the blog posts in phpclasses.org? Everytime a reference to this blog is posted I lose track of the discussion, because I can't really grasp what Lemos is talking about. I'd like to make some some constructive criticism, not just to Lemos but to the community in general, since I think many of us need to improve our writing skills: 1 - Don't make lng boooring posts. This blog in reality is the site monthly announcement newsletter. Some months there is more to tell than in others. I usually put a list of contents when the post is about many subjects. Then maybe you should consider making it a _weekly_ announcement newsletter, 'cause some of those posts are really really too long to digest in only one shot. 2 - Get to the point. Introduction are great when they are not two pages long. I don't know what you mean by introduction. Usually there is a summary that goes in the RSS feed that is no longer than 3 or 4 paragraphs. I mean all the things you need to say before actually getting into what you want to talk about. Just take for example the post about recommend php framework, look how much you have to read before actually get any info relating directly to php frameworks. Is true that there are many things to say before about frameworks hype, but couldn't it be explained in less words? 3 - Stick to the topic. Or use appropiate titles. 4 - If the topic is inherently long, use distinguishable headers and subheaders. It's a pain in the ass to read a 5 pages long article that looks the same everywhere, with no easy way to know what is the subtopic of what are you reading now. As I said, these posts often cover many topics. It may not seem by topic sections use titles. The problem is that this newsletter posts used to go by e-mail to the site subscribers in plain text, so there was no way to format titles. I was unaware of that, I understand now. It's really a pain in the ass to format a text only email for proper reading even more if the same text has to be used in a website. Anyway, now that you mentioned it I applied an additional regular expression to add title formatting when presenting it in the site. Just let me know if it looks ok now. Yeah, I saw that. I believe it's a little bit better now. 5 - Don't talk so much about your life! You can always make another blog for that... Unless your personal experience can bring an unique insight of the point you're trying to make. I suppose you may be talking about other peoples blogs. Personal blogs are supposed to be personal. This is the PHPClasses site blog. Usually it covers matters about the site developments and matters of interest to the site users. It does not talk about my life. It may talk about my experience when it is relevant to the post topic. Generally speaking, yes, I'm talking about other peoples blogs. I'm sick tired of all the holy crusades out there, specially when it comes to Web2.0evangelists. You may have not noticed it but somewhere here or there you let your subconcious write for you, specially on the topic of Web2.0 (I used the term twice already, please stop me before I have to pay royalties to O'reilly). It may be just an adjective, but that's all it takes to make a mildly objetive point of view turn into a completely subjective point of view. Just check your article about is php ready for ... *that thing I said before*, and you'll see that how, without noticing it, personal feelings tend to appear and change the article completely. Probably that's what made you write so much about how you believe phpclasses.org is a *that term* enabled site, and why. Was all that really necesary for the purpose of the article? Or you were just uncounciously trying to prove something to all those lamers out there? Does it really matter if your site is in or out? We are not fashion designers...
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 17:23 -0300, Manuel Lemos wrote: Hello, on 08/03/2006 02:53 PM Robert Cummings said the following: The main thing in Manual's post that got me writing this in the first place was : Imagine if there would be only one PDBC (JDBC for PHP). Instead of that we have a never ending choice of PHP database abstraction layers that does not help newcoming developers that are lost and don't know what to use. I admit I have not expressed myself clearly. What I meant is not that people should be disallowed to implement alternative APIs, but rather that they should not feel the need to do it. I think you may be missing the point. Many people probably don't feel the need to create an alternative API, they may just feel the desire to do so. It's a great way to practice your skills, and in the end, you have a nice API that meets your needs. I do not think many people want to reinvent the wheel. Only those that feel forced to do it, because the alternatives are insufficient, will do it, only if they feel capable of doing it. If there were consensual API specifications like in Java world, very few people would feel forced to reinvent the wheel. I beg to differ. I think a good number of people really enjoy re-inventing the wheel :) Also because some people don't like working with other people's square wheels, or wheels designed for a pram when they want wheels for a racing bike, or wheels that run in the wrong direction, or wheels that turn too slowly, or wheels that need expensive tyres, or (the list is endless) -- 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: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/04/2006 05:47 PM Robert Cummings said the following: The point of the post is that there is no framework in particular to recommend. I use my own packages for my needs. They suit me well. It does not mean they will suit everybody. How would you know that there is no framework to recommend if you neve ruse anyone's code but your own. How could you have possibly given any framework sufficient attention to have any idea of its pros and cons? I know many frameworks that exist, I have seen their code and their documentation, which is more than enough to reach the conclusion that using the frameworks that exist is not better that using my own solutions for my own purposes. Aaaah, so you are trully a genius to be able to at a glance of documentation and source code fully deduce the usefulness of something. I bow before you. Be seriuos. Nobody needs to actually use any framework to see that it is not suitable for your needs, when you can just browse the source code and documentation. It would be insane to try all PHP frameworks that exist to reach that conclusion. And there's the rub... your article was not about what YOU needed it was what YOU considered to be the best framework for everyone based on briefly browsing the code. Your article, if it had any real merit, would have reported on the actual trial of a substantial number of frameworks so that you could provide a valuable analysis instead of superficial opinion. Remember a recommendation, is not about YOU, it's about those reading the article. I can agree with your previous statement until you start recommending it in general. My article is mine. It was not written for you but rather to the PHPClasses site users in first place. Therefore it includes whatever I think it is best for me to mention. If you do not agree and think it should be something else, go and write your own article in your own blog rather than bossing me to do something different, as if I owe you anything. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You're either pro-choice with a myriad of choices to choose from, or you're anti-choice and want only one framework style. Get of the fence! Having standard API specifications does not prevent anybody to choose using solutions based on APIs that do not conform to any standard specifications. Furthermore I do not think that seem to understand the difference between an API specification and API implementation. J2EE is an API specification with many implementations from different vendors: Sun, IBM, Oracle, BEA, JBoss (this last one is Open Source). You can choose the implementation you want. There is plenty of choice to anybody. If you want to use a J2EE implementation to build your applications, otherwise you are free to use something else. It's seems people have chosen... and they've chosen not to bother with some kind of standard API. That's not to say one won't emerge, but it doesn't seem like it's important at this time. Sure, but you are missing the point about the way Java specifications are built. They gather around interested players in the field of each kind of framework, so it is more consensual that just an unilateral proposal. If version 1.0 of an API is not good enough, they gather again, eventually joining more interested players and build a better specification. For instance, JDBC API specification had at least 3 major versions. There is no need to create a new completely backwards incompatible API specification. Everybody would loose with that. Building a completely new API specification would make sense if it was for very different purposes. I wasn't missing the point. I am quite aware of how the process works behind closed doors with a select few high profile companies and committees. I'm also quite aware of the pros of standardization, but I don't necessarily feel that hand picking the standard is necessarily better than an emergent standard. Either way, as I keep saying, if there was a strong enough desire for such standardization then I'm sure people would be forming such groups. maybe with the launch of Zend Framework there will be a rallying point, but then again, maybe it will just be yet another framework. People cannot have desire for something that they do not know or do not have a vision about its benefits. Sun had a good vision about defining API specification standards. It attracted many companies, including competitors that made Java adoption grow enourmously. Zend does not seem to have such vision. Zend Framework is an implementation, not a specification. Without a well defined specification, nobody can provide alternative implementations even if they wanted. I am afraid that Zend Framework is fated to be just yet another PHP framework struggling against other frameworks for a small piece of adoption share. I am sure their project would have much better adoption if they focused on building a specification resulting from a
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
On Sat, 2006-08-05 at 15:36 -0300, Manuel Lemos wrote: Hello, on 08/04/2006 05:47 PM Robert Cummings said the following: The point of the post is that there is no framework in particular to recommend. I use my own packages for my needs. They suit me well. It does not mean they will suit everybody. How would you know that there is no framework to recommend if you neve ruse anyone's code but your own. How could you have possibly given any framework sufficient attention to have any idea of its pros and cons? I know many frameworks that exist, I have seen their code and their documentation, which is more than enough to reach the conclusion that using the frameworks that exist is not better that using my own solutions for my own purposes. Aaaah, so you are trully a genius to be able to at a glance of documentation and source code fully deduce the usefulness of something. I bow before you. Be seriuos. Nobody needs to actually use any framework to see that it is not suitable for your needs, when you can just browse the source code and documentation. It would be insane to try all PHP frameworks that exist to reach that conclusion. And there's the rub... your article was not about what YOU needed it was what YOU considered to be the best framework for everyone based on briefly browsing the code. Your article, if it had any real merit, would have reported on the actual trial of a substantial number of frameworks so that you could provide a valuable analysis instead of superficial opinion. Remember a recommendation, is not about YOU, it's about those reading the article. I can agree with your previous statement until you start recommending it in general. My article is mine. It was not written for you but rather to the PHPClasses site users in first place. Therefore it includes whatever I think it is best for me to mention. If you do not agree and think it should be something else, go and write your own article in your own blog rather than bossing me to do something different, as if I owe you anything. I've been registered with the PHPClasses site for a couple of years at least now. I get the regular emails and I've never taken issue in the past. But this particular one was way out there. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You're either pro-choice with a myriad of choices to choose from, or you're anti-choice and want only one framework style. Get of the fence! Having standard API specifications does not prevent anybody to choose using solutions based on APIs that do not conform to any standard specifications. Furthermore I do not think that seem to understand the difference between an API specification and API implementation. J2EE is an API specification with many implementations from different vendors: Sun, IBM, Oracle, BEA, JBoss (this last one is Open Source). You can choose the implementation you want. There is plenty of choice to anybody. If you want to use a J2EE implementation to build your applications, otherwise you are free to use something else. It's seems people have chosen... and they've chosen not to bother with some kind of standard API. That's not to say one won't emerge, but it doesn't seem like it's important at this time. Sure, but you are missing the point about the way Java specifications are built. They gather around interested players in the field of each kind of framework, so it is more consensual that just an unilateral proposal. If version 1.0 of an API is not good enough, they gather again, eventually joining more interested players and build a better specification. For instance, JDBC API specification had at least 3 major versions. There is no need to create a new completely backwards incompatible API specification. Everybody would loose with that. Building a completely new API specification would make sense if it was for very different purposes. I wasn't missing the point. I am quite aware of how the process works behind closed doors with a select few high profile companies and committees. I'm also quite aware of the pros of standardization, but I don't necessarily feel that hand picking the standard is necessarily better than an emergent standard. Either way, as I keep saying, if there was a strong enough desire for such standardization then I'm sure people would be forming such groups. maybe with the launch of Zend Framework there will be a rallying point, but then again, maybe it will just be yet another framework. People cannot have desire for something that they do not know or do not have a vision about its benefits. Sun had a good vision about defining API specification standards. It attracted many companies, including competitors that made Java adoption grow enourmously. Zend does not seem to have such vision. Zend Framework is an implementation, not a specification. Without a well defined specification,
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/03/2006 02:49 PM Robert Cummings said the following: The point of the post is that there is no framework in particular to recommend. I use my own packages for my needs. They suit me well. It does not mean they will suit everybody. How would you know that there is no framework to recommend if you neve ruse anyone's code but your own. How could you have possibly given any framework sufficient attention to have any idea of its pros and cons? I know many frameworks that exist, I have seen their code and their documentation, which is more than enough to reach the conclusion that using the frameworks that exist is not better that using my own solutions for my own purposes. Aaaah, so you are trully a genius to be able to at a glance of documentation and source code fully deduce the usefulness of something. I bow before you. Be seriuos. Nobody needs to actually use any framework to see that it is not suitable for your needs, when you can just browse the source code and documentation. It would be insane to try all PHP frameworks that exist to reach that conclusion. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You're either pro-choice with a myriad of choices to choose from, or you're anti-choice and want only one framework style. Get of the fence! Having standard API specifications does not prevent anybody to choose using solutions based on APIs that do not conform to any standard specifications. Furthermore I do not think that seem to understand the difference between an API specification and API implementation. J2EE is an API specification with many implementations from different vendors: Sun, IBM, Oracle, BEA, JBoss (this last one is Open Source). You can choose the implementation you want. There is plenty of choice to anybody. If you want to use a J2EE implementation to build your applications, otherwise you are free to use something else. It's seems people have chosen... and they've chosen not to bother with some kind of standard API. That's not to say one won't emerge, but it doesn't seem like it's important at this time. Sure, but you are missing the point about the way Java specifications are built. They gather around interested players in the field of each kind of framework, so it is more consensual that just an unilateral proposal. If version 1.0 of an API is not good enough, they gather again, eventually joining more interested players and build a better specification. For instance, JDBC API specification had at least 3 major versions. There is no need to create a new completely backwards incompatible API specification. Everybody would loose with that. Building a completely new API specification would make sense if it was for very different purposes. Let me give a concrete example, I have developed some plug-ins for this forms class that provide auto-complete support to text inputs and linked select inputs. They use AJAX to retrieve auto-complete text options and switch the linked select options from a database on the server. http://www.phpclasses.org/formsgeneration It is not viable for me to support all database API that exist for PHP. Actually it is already a big deal that that I could find time to support MySQL (directly) or a bunch of other databases using Metabase or PEAR::MDB2 API. The developers that use other database API cannot benefit from these auto-complete and linked select plug-ins, unless they develop variants of the plugins that support the database API that they prefer, but then they would be on their own as I would not be able to provide support to them. There's this thing called an adapter pattern. Great for retrofitting other people's code without actually modifying it. That is what Metabase and PEAR::MDB2 do, database adapting, same API and same behavior for all supported databases. Furthermore, the plug-in sub-classes that support different databases, only override a few base class methods . It would not be hard to adapt them for more API. I just do not have the time nor the interest to build variants for the bazillions of other database abstraction layers. Some do not even support the necessary abstraction features. For instance, AFAIK other database abstraction layers besides Metabase and PEAR::MDB2 do not support pattern escaping. This is necessary to escape wildcards characters that should be taken literally in patterns. It is needed to implement the auto-complete feature using SQL conditions of type field LIKE 'typed-text%'. If typed-text contains % or _, it must be escaped. Some databases like MS SQL need to escape other characters too. Everybody looses opportunities with this. If there was a standard API database specification for PHP like PDBC similar to JDBC, there would be no such problem. There are two ways for standards to come about. They can be hand picked or they can emerge. Hand picked requires the community organization of which you speak. Emergent standards requires the
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 17:15 -0300, Manuel Lemos wrote: Hello, on 08/03/2006 02:49 PM Robert Cummings said the following: The point of the post is that there is no framework in particular to recommend. I use my own packages for my needs. They suit me well. It does not mean they will suit everybody. How would you know that there is no framework to recommend if you neve ruse anyone's code but your own. How could you have possibly given any framework sufficient attention to have any idea of its pros and cons? I know many frameworks that exist, I have seen their code and their documentation, which is more than enough to reach the conclusion that using the frameworks that exist is not better that using my own solutions for my own purposes. Aaaah, so you are trully a genius to be able to at a glance of documentation and source code fully deduce the usefulness of something. I bow before you. Be seriuos. Nobody needs to actually use any framework to see that it is not suitable for your needs, when you can just browse the source code and documentation. It would be insane to try all PHP frameworks that exist to reach that conclusion. And there's the rub... your article was not about what YOU needed it was what YOU considered to be the best framework for everyone based on briefly browsing the code. Your article, if it had any real merit, would have reported on the actual trial of a substantial number of frameworks so that you could provide a valuable analysis instead of superficial opinion. Remember a recommendation, is not about YOU, it's about those reading the article. I can agree with your previous statement until you start recommending it in general. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You're either pro-choice with a myriad of choices to choose from, or you're anti-choice and want only one framework style. Get of the fence! Having standard API specifications does not prevent anybody to choose using solutions based on APIs that do not conform to any standard specifications. Furthermore I do not think that seem to understand the difference between an API specification and API implementation. J2EE is an API specification with many implementations from different vendors: Sun, IBM, Oracle, BEA, JBoss (this last one is Open Source). You can choose the implementation you want. There is plenty of choice to anybody. If you want to use a J2EE implementation to build your applications, otherwise you are free to use something else. It's seems people have chosen... and they've chosen not to bother with some kind of standard API. That's not to say one won't emerge, but it doesn't seem like it's important at this time. Sure, but you are missing the point about the way Java specifications are built. They gather around interested players in the field of each kind of framework, so it is more consensual that just an unilateral proposal. If version 1.0 of an API is not good enough, they gather again, eventually joining more interested players and build a better specification. For instance, JDBC API specification had at least 3 major versions. There is no need to create a new completely backwards incompatible API specification. Everybody would loose with that. Building a completely new API specification would make sense if it was for very different purposes. I wasn't missing the point. I am quite aware of how the process works behind closed doors with a select few high profile companies and committees. I'm also quite aware of the pros of standardization, but I don't necessarily feel that hand picking the standard is necessarily better than an emergent standard. Either way, as I keep saying, if there was a strong enough desire for such standardization then I'm sure people would be forming such groups. maybe with the launch of Zend Framework there will be a rallying point, but then again, maybe it will just be yet another framework. Let me give a concrete example, I have developed some plug-ins for this forms class that provide auto-complete support to text inputs and linked select inputs. They use AJAX to retrieve auto-complete text options and switch the linked select options from a database on the server. http://www.phpclasses.org/formsgeneration It is not viable for me to support all database API that exist for PHP. Actually it is already a big deal that that I could find time to support MySQL (directly) or a bunch of other databases using Metabase or PEAR::MDB2 API. The developers that use other database API cannot benefit from these auto-complete and linked select plug-ins, unless they develop variants of the plugins that support the database API that they prefer, but then they would be on their own as I would not be able to provide support to them. There's this thing called an adapter pattern. Great for retrofitting other people's code without actually modifying it. That is
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/03/2006 02:53 PM Robert Cummings said the following: The main thing in Manual's post that got me writing this in the first place was : Imagine if there would be only one PDBC (JDBC for PHP). Instead of that we have a never ending choice of PHP database abstraction layers that does not help newcoming developers that are lost and don't know what to use. I admit I have not expressed myself clearly. What I meant is not that people should be disallowed to implement alternative APIs, but rather that they should not feel the need to do it. I think you may be missing the point. Many people probably don't feel the need to create an alternative API, they may just feel the desire to do so. It's a great way to practice your skills, and in the end, you have a nice API that meets your needs. I do not think many people want to reinvent the wheel. Only those that feel forced to do it, because the alternatives are insufficient, will do it, only if they feel capable of doing it. If there were consensual API specifications like in Java world, very few people would feel forced to reinvent the wheel. In the Java world, JDBC is the de facto standard because Java developers do not feel the need to develop other database APIs. That happens because JDBC is a standard API defined by several players from the SQL database world that sit together and defined a consensual API specification. In the PHP world there is no such organization nor the vision of the benefits of cooperating to define such standards. I already gave an example of the benefits of having such standard API specifications in the other comment to Rob. Almost all APIs can be wrapped when necessary. Hell, the PHP engine is in many cases just a wrapper around a C API. The things you say just to avoid agreeing! ;-) Most of those C APIs are also not based in any consensual standard API specifications. Because of that, there will always be people that rewrite other API for the same purpose either in C or even in pure PHP. The lack of consense is the problem. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Metastorage - Data object relational mapping layer generator http://www.metastorage.net/ PHP Classes - Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/03/2006 02:52 PM Kilbride, James P. said the following: I admit I have not expressed myself clearly. What I meant is not that people should be disallowed to implement alternative APIs, but rather that they should not feel the need to do it. In the Java world, JDBC is the de facto standard because Java developers do not feel the need to develop other database APIs. That happens because JDBC is a standard API defined by several players from the SQL database world that sit together and defined a consensual API specification. This is partially true because Java is owned and managed by SUN, and SUN is all about developing API's, both to ensure that it's own later work will work, and because it meant a better way for people to interface. I do not agree with that. Many Java API are defined by many parties besides Sun. For instance, the JDBC specification was defined by an experts group from several companies listed here: http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=54 By the same token Pear_DB, and the follow ons were much like the early versino of JDBC. As is PDO in a lot of ways. The majority of the database specifics have been abstracted out and a general interface has emerged. Unlike in Java though, the PDO and Pear_(M)DB(2) families haven't settled yet(nor did JDBC overnight) but they are being developed by the community. And many people DO recognize the advantage of The matter here is not PHP versus Java. The matter is using APIs defined in consense with several interested parties of the community. The PHP community is very uncooperative. Let me give you an example. It happens that I am the Metabase developer. Metabase is the base of PEAR::MDB. PEAR::MDB2 is the follow-up of PEAR::MDB. Before PEAR::MDB existed, I invited ADODB author to cooperate and develop a common PHP database instead of keep copying Metabase features to provide the same functionality with an incompatible API. He refused to cooperate without giving a proper reason. When I tried to submit Metabase to PEAR, it was refused with all possible lame excuses that PEAR people could find then. They demanded a complete rewrite to match their style guidelines. That was completely inviable to me as Metabase had already over 12,000 lines of code. Instead I proposed that somebody does it. Fortunately Lukas Smith was brave enough to accept the proposal. It took a lot of time to convert all the code and many bugs appeared when none existed due to normal human misunderstanding mistakes. Meanwhile Metabase continued to evolve and PEAR::MDB too, but independently, hardly benefiting of mutual efforts. Several tools have been developed around each API. Tools for one API do not work with another API without a signficant conversion effort. It would have been much better if all parties have sit together and cooperate in defining a consensual API. I am not even talking about having a single API implemention. Different implementations could exist based on the same API specification. It would all have been much better for all the PHP community. But you could argue, how is PDO not a standard interface like JDBC? How was it not designed by the community and put out there for people to implement their own methods for it? Forget PDO, it is yet another attempt to succeed where PHP ODBC and DBX extensions have failed. PDO is not based on consensual API specification. Therefore, it is ill fated to be used only by a fraction of the PHP users. The same goes to Zend Framework and other unilateral developements. That was the point of the blog post. While different API developers do not open their minds and cooperate with each other, nobody will benefit from consensual API specifications in the PHP world. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Metastorage - Data object relational mapping layer generator http://www.metastorage.net/ PHP Classes - Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
On Fri, 2006-08-04 at 17:23 -0300, Manuel Lemos wrote: Hello, on 08/03/2006 02:53 PM Robert Cummings said the following: The main thing in Manual's post that got me writing this in the first place was : Imagine if there would be only one PDBC (JDBC for PHP). Instead of that we have a never ending choice of PHP database abstraction layers that does not help newcoming developers that are lost and don't know what to use. I admit I have not expressed myself clearly. What I meant is not that people should be disallowed to implement alternative APIs, but rather that they should not feel the need to do it. I think you may be missing the point. Many people probably don't feel the need to create an alternative API, they may just feel the desire to do so. It's a great way to practice your skills, and in the end, you have a nice API that meets your needs. I do not think many people want to reinvent the wheel. Only those that feel forced to do it, because the alternatives are insufficient, will do it, only if they feel capable of doing it. If there were consensual API specifications like in Java world, very few people would feel forced to reinvent the wheel. I beg to differ. I think a good number of people really enjoy re-inventing the wheel :) Cheers, Rob. -- .. | InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com | :: | An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting | | a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services | | such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn | | also provides an extremely flexible architecture for | | creating re-usable components quickly and easily. | `' -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/03/2006 05:18 PM Martin Alterisio said the following: Anyway, you may want to read this more in depth reflection of the state of the PHP framework world and recommendations on how to pick what suits best for you: http://www.phpclasses.org/blog/post/52-Recommended-PHP-frameworks.html Sorry to intrude with my usual obnoxious behaviour, but this is starting to affect my self-esteem (what's left of it). Am I the only one who has a really hard time reading the blog posts in phpclasses.org? Everytime a reference to this blog is posted I lose track of the discussion, because I can't really grasp what Lemos is talking about. I'd like to make some some constructive criticism, not just to Lemos but to the community in general, since I think many of us need to improve our writing skills: 1 - Don't make lng boooring posts. This blog in reality is the site monthly announcement newsletter. Some months there is more to tell than in others. I usually put a list of contents when the post is about many subjects. 2 - Get to the point. Introduction are great when they are not two pages long. I don't know what you mean by introduction. Usually there is a summary that goes in the RSS feed that is no longer than 3 or 4 paragraphs. 3 - Stick to the topic. Or use appropiate titles. 4 - If the topic is inherently long, use distinguishable headers and subheaders. It's a pain in the ass to read a 5 pages long article that looks the same everywhere, with no easy way to know what is the subtopic of what are you reading now. As I said, these posts often cover many topics. It may not seem by topic sections use titles. The problem is that this newsletter posts used to go by e-mail to the site subscribers in plain text, so there was no way to format titles. Anyway, now that you mentioned it I applied an additional regular expression to add title formatting when presenting it in the site. Just let me know if it looks ok now. 5 - Don't talk so much about your life! You can always make another blog for that... Unless your personal experience can bring an unique insight of the point you're trying to make. I suppose you may be talking about other peoples blogs. Personal blogs are supposed to be personal. This is the PHPClasses site blog. Usually it covers matters about the site developments and matters of interest to the site users. It does not talk about my life. It may talk about my experience when it is relevant to the post topic. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Metastorage - Data object relational mapping layer generator http://www.metastorage.net/ PHP Classes - Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
PHPClasses 0 - Botanist 1 :-) Paul Scott wrote: You mean we should all be happy that so much choice is available! I agree with Rob! I am a botanist. I have never been trained in Computer Science, as far as industry is concerned, I am not qualified to turn on a PC. Fortunately for me, I am also a geek. My PHP experiences started when running experiments in my wet labs, monitoring seaweed growth. If PHP did not allow me to get away with writing newbie (read bad) code, I would have given up and just done it the old way that botanists have been doing it for centuries. PHP gave me that freedom to start, and as a result, I now am a reasonably decent PHP developer, and run a collaborative network in 16 (and growing) African countries working on a PHP framework that I designed and wrote. Go figure. Choice is that important. If I had started with JDBC or a Java based way of doing things, this stuff would have never happened. Frameworks are not only pieces of software, but create communities of like minded people. They also build skills (and business opportunities) as ours does. If there were no choice, we would all be VB style drones with no creativity and no forward movement. Please direct flames to file 13. --Paul All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer http://www.uwc.ac.za/portal/uwc2006/content/mail_disclaimer/index.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
I'm not so sure if the botanist wasn't saying in a rather confused way that he was playing on the same side as PHPClasses, even if he did profess to be in the other team. Did he say he was rolling his own (in a way only botanists can do) or not? -Original Message- From: Jochem Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 August 2006 12:37 To: Paul Scott Cc: Robert Cummings; Manuel Lemos; php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion PHPClasses 0 - Botanist 1 :-) Paul Scott wrote: You mean we should all be happy that so much choice is available! I agree with Rob! I am a botanist. I have never been trained in Computer Science, as far as industry is concerned, I am not qualified to turn on a PC. Fortunately for me, I am also a geek. My PHP experiences started when running experiments in my wet labs, monitoring seaweed growth. If PHP did not allow me to get away with writing newbie (read bad) code, I would have given up and just done it the old way that botanists have been doing it for centuries. PHP gave me that freedom to start, and as a result, I now am a reasonably decent PHP developer, and run a collaborative network in 16 (and growing) African countries working on a PHP framework that I designed and wrote. Go figure. Choice is that important. If I had started with JDBC or a Java based way of doing things, this stuff would have never happened. Frameworks are not only pieces of software, but create communities of like minded people. They also build skills (and business opportunities) as ours does. If there were no choice, we would all be VB style drones with no creativity and no forward movement. Please direct flames to file 13. --Paul -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Arno Kuhl wrote: I'm not so sure if the botanist wasn't saying in a rather confused way that he was playing on the same side as PHPClasses, even if he did profess to be in the other team. Did he say he was rolling his own (in a way only botanists can do) or not? that's beside the point - manuel tried to have his cake and eat when he a, stated writing everying yourself was preferable and b, Java was better because they have standardized APIs for framework development allowing people to switch between frameworks. besides which manuel's 'article' is crap, rob's assessment of it was pretty spot on (and it's not the first time manuel has plugged the 'article'). in the end evilMe(tm) was just fanning the flames. ;- -Original Message- From: Jochem Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 August 2006 12:37 To: Paul Scott Cc: Robert Cummings; Manuel Lemos; php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion PHPClasses 0 - Botanist 1 :-) Paul Scott wrote: You mean we should all be happy that so much choice is available! I agree with Rob! I am a botanist. I have never been trained in Computer Science, as far as industry is concerned, I am not qualified to turn on a PC. Fortunately for me, I am also a geek. My PHP experiences started when running experiments in my wet labs, monitoring seaweed growth. If PHP did not allow me to get away with writing newbie (read bad) code, I would have given up and just done it the old way that botanists have been doing it for centuries. PHP gave me that freedom to start, and as a result, I now am a reasonably decent PHP developer, and run a collaborative network in 16 (and growing) African countries working on a PHP framework that I designed and wrote. Go figure. Choice is that important. If I had started with JDBC or a Java based way of doing things, this stuff would have never happened. Frameworks are not only pieces of software, but create communities of like minded people. They also build skills (and business opportunities) as ours does. If there were no choice, we would all be VB style drones with no creativity and no forward movement. Please direct flames to file 13. --Paul -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 13:43 +0200, Arno Kuhl wrote: I'm not so sure if the botanist wasn't saying in a rather confused way that he was playing on the same side as PHPClasses, even if he did profess to be in the other team. Did he say he was rolling his own (in a way only botanists can do) or not? What I am saying is that PHPClasses is a cool site, hell, I have even contributed a bunch of classes to it; but, what Manuel is saying, I do not agree with. I am all for choice, I am all for my project, and I am all for working collaboratively. I _choose_ to code strictly OOP, I don't have to. I choose to abstract almost everything in my code, nobody forcing me to do that. I choose to use many different authors GPL/BSD/PHP licenced code in my projects, not because of any other reason that I am lazy, and choose not to re-invent the wheel. I choose to do these things because I have the option to choose. I also choose to release every piece of code that I have ever written under a Free licence, not a freedom from price licence only. I choose to release all of my publications under a CC-BY-SA licence too. I am free, I think freely, and I have the freedom to do what needs to be done. I sleep well at night on the rare occasions that I am not coding Free Software. :) The main thing in Manual's post that got me writing this in the first place was : Imagine if there would be only one PDBC (JDBC for PHP). Instead of that we have a never ending choice of PHP database abstraction layers that does not help newcoming developers that are lost and don't know what to use. Now in summation I say That is just asinine. That is what makes PHP cool, especially in Africa. period. --Paul All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer http://www.uwc.ac.za/portal/uwc2006/content/mail_disclaimer/index.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
On Wed, August 2, 2006 9:50 am, Gabe wrote: Gabe wrote: What's the common consensus as to a solid PHP framework to use for application development? There seems to be a number of them out there, but I'm not sure which one's are the most robust, actively developed, secure, etc etc. Thoughts? Sounds like it's just personal preference. But thanks for all the posts! Too bad there isn't a skeleton sort-of system that you essentially then just plug in the modules that you want/need to flesh it out. Then you'd have your own customized framework for each app that is developed and keeps *all* of the modules relevant to that app. Nothing extra would be included that isn't needed. Then as a developer all you're looking for is modules and not huge frameworks that may include lots of functionality that you don't have any interest in. It would certainly keep any attack surface smaller when it comes to vulnerabilities. It's arguable that using a highly popular framework makes your attack surface larger. The Bad Guys would MUCH rather have a hack that they can use to attack a million sites than one that would only work on one of my stupid little sites that nobody visits and nobody cares about anyway. Is there anything out there like that? You may want to look at Drupal, Cake, PHPNuke, Smarty, ... The list is endless, really, with a dizzying array of different features. And you're not going to get any kind of concensus on this one at this time, and probably not for the forseeable future. -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/03/2006 02:01 AM Robert Cummings said the following: Anyway, you may want to read this more in depth reflection of the state of the PHP framework world and recommendations on how to pick what suits best for you: http://www.phpclasses.org/blog/post/52-Recommended-PHP-frameworks.html I've read it before... it was crud. You provide no recommendation for any framework but instead try to pimp phpclasses. From what I gathered you haven't even actually tried anywhere in the vicinity of 10% of the frameworks in existence and yet you feel obliged to write a commenatary called Recommended PHP Frameworks in which you don't even recommend a framework. Additionally somehow while pimping phpclasses you also feel it necessary to indicate how you don't use any code other than what you write yourself. Egads, if you won't use the code on your site why the hell should anyone else? The answer to that question is in the post. I only use my own (PHP) packages because I can. Not everybody can afford writing package for their own needs from scratch. Why would I lie when that post expresses exactly how I feel? The point of the post is that there is no framework in particular to recommend. I use my own packages for my needs. They suit me well. It does not mean they will suit everybody. How would you know that there is no framework to recommend if you neve ruse anyone's code but your own. How could you have possibly given any framework sufficient attention to have any idea of its pros and cons? I know many frameworks that exist, I have seen their code and their documentation, which is more than enough to reach the conclusion that using the frameworks that exist is not better that using my own solutions for my own purposes. I do not need to jump off a building to realize that it would not be a better idea than using the stairs or the elevator. It is a bit exaggerated metaphor because I really do not think that using somebody else's PHP code is like suicide. I just think that using my own code that is proven and has matured during many years, is much better for my own purposes than using something existing frameworks. The PHPClasses site content is made of packages contributed by developers that wrote their own packages. Those other packages often serve the same purposes as some of my packages. I am pro-choice. That is the spirit of the PHPClasses site. Everybody can publish their packages. Let the users be the judges of which are the best for whatever purposes. That is pure fair play. Is that a bad thing? I don't think so. I also would like to emphasize what I said above regarding the total lack of organization and cooperation of the PHP community. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You're either pro-choice with a myriad of choices to choose from, or you're anti-choice and want only one framework style. Get of the fence! Having standard API specifications does not prevent anybody to choose using solutions based on APIs that do not conform to any standard specifications. Furthermore I do not think that seem to understand the difference between an API specification and API implementation. J2EE is an API specification with many implementations from different vendors: Sun, IBM, Oracle, BEA, JBoss (this last one is Open Source). You can choose the implementation you want. There is plenty of choice to anybody. If you want to use a J2EE implementation to build your applications, otherwise you are free to use something else. If there were standard specifications for packages and frameworks like there is in the Java world, maybe you would not have this discussion. There could be a consense to use the same standard API with eventual multiple implementations from different developers or vendors. Imagine if there would be only one PDBC (JDBC for PHP). Instead of that we have a never ending choice of PHP database abstraction layers that does not help newcoming developers that are lost and don't know what to use. You presume that any chosen standard methodology or whatever you want to I am not talking of implementation methodologies, I am talking about API specifications. The same API specification can be implement with different methodologies. As long as they pass API compliance tests, that is all right. call it would be correct. Because if it wasn't correct, no matter how organized you think a community might be, something different WILL emerge. Right now there may be 100 frameworks, probably still growing, but not all will be accepted into mainstream use, and that ultimately will determine which one's have staying power or at the very least -- which ones have reach. The fact that there are so many is a testament to how easy it is to manipulate the power placed in the hands of the PHP developer. It is not indicative of disorganization within the community. You totally misunderstand me. When I talk about lack of organization in the PHP community, I
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/03/2006 07:37 AM Jochem Maas said the following: PHPClasses 0 - Botanist 1 :-) Erm Paul Scott is a good contributor of the PHPClasses site: http://www.phpclasses.org/browse/author/145758.html Several of his classes have been nominated to the PHP Programming Innovation Award: http://www.phpclasses.org/winners.html -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Metastorage - Data object relational mapping layer generator http://www.metastorage.net/ PHP Classes - Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/03/2006 09:17 AM Jochem Maas said the following: Arno Kuhl wrote: I'm not so sure if the botanist wasn't saying in a rather confused way that he was playing on the same side as PHPClasses, even if he did profess to be in the other team. Did he say he was rolling his own (in a way only botanists can do) or not? that's beside the point - manuel tried to have his cake and eat when he a, stated writing everying yourself was preferable and b, Java was better because they have standardized APIs for framework development allowing people to switch between frameworks. You totally distorting what I said. a. I said my packages are preferred for my own purposes. I did not say that my packages are prefferrable for other peoples purposes. b. I did not say Java is better, otherwise I would use Java, which I don't. I said that in the Java world the is something called Java Community Process (JCP) which is a body made from people from the Java community that is responsible for specifying Java APIs. That would be a good thing to adopt by the PHP community if it were more organized and cooperative. besides which manuel's 'article' is crap, rob's assessment of it was pretty spot on (and it's not the first time manuel has plugged the 'article'). in the end evilMe(tm) was just fanning the flames. ;- I am sorry you felt the need to be disrespectful and resort to personal insult, even more in public. It is a clear sign that you run out of serious arguments and do not have anything worthy to add to the discussion. But I cannot be bothered if your parents did not give you proper education. You do not deserve further of my attention. Do not bother to reply. I will not follow up. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Metastorage - Data object relational mapping layer generator http://www.metastorage.net/ PHP Classes - Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Hello, on 08/03/2006 09:25 AM Paul Scott said the following: The main thing in Manual's post that got me writing this in the first place was : Imagine if there would be only one PDBC (JDBC for PHP). Instead of that we have a never ending choice of PHP database abstraction layers that does not help newcoming developers that are lost and don't know what to use. I admit I have not expressed myself clearly. What I meant is not that people should be disallowed to implement alternative APIs, but rather that they should not feel the need to do it. In the Java world, JDBC is the de facto standard because Java developers do not feel the need to develop other database APIs. That happens because JDBC is a standard API defined by several players from the SQL database world that sit together and defined a consensual API specification. In the PHP world there is no such organization nor the vision of the benefits of cooperating to define such standards. I already gave an example of the benefits of having such standard API specifications in the other comment to Rob. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Metastorage - Data object relational mapping layer generator http://www.metastorage.net/ PHP Classes - Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 13:32 -0300, Manuel Lemos wrote: Hello, on 08/03/2006 02:01 AM Robert Cummings said the following: Anyway, you may want to read this more in depth reflection of the state of the PHP framework world and recommendations on how to pick what suits best for you: http://www.phpclasses.org/blog/post/52-Recommended-PHP-frameworks.html I've read it before... it was crud. You provide no recommendation for any framework but instead try to pimp phpclasses. From what I gathered you haven't even actually tried anywhere in the vicinity of 10% of the frameworks in existence and yet you feel obliged to write a commenatary called Recommended PHP Frameworks in which you don't even recommend a framework. Additionally somehow while pimping phpclasses you also feel it necessary to indicate how you don't use any code other than what you write yourself. Egads, if you won't use the code on your site why the hell should anyone else? The answer to that question is in the post. I only use my own (PHP) packages because I can. Not everybody can afford writing package for their own needs from scratch. Why would I lie when that post expresses exactly how I feel? The point of the post is that there is no framework in particular to recommend. I use my own packages for my needs. They suit me well. It does not mean they will suit everybody. How would you know that there is no framework to recommend if you neve ruse anyone's code but your own. How could you have possibly given any framework sufficient attention to have any idea of its pros and cons? I know many frameworks that exist, I have seen their code and their documentation, which is more than enough to reach the conclusion that using the frameworks that exist is not better that using my own solutions for my own purposes. Aaaah, so you are trully a genius to be able to at a glance of documentation and source code fully deduce the usefulness of something. I bow before you. I do not need to jump off a building to realize that it would not be a better idea than using the stairs or the elevator. That depends, if there was one of those great big inflated stunt things at the bottom, I'd certainly give it a go. But then I generally look before I leap. It is a bit exaggerated metaphor because I really do not think that using somebody else's PHP code is like suicide. I just think that using my own code that is proven and has matured during many years, is much better for my own purposes than using something existing frameworks. You are fully entitle to that stance, I commend it, but then to move forward and write a commentary about recommended PHP frameworks in which you make no recommendation... well that just doesn't sit right. The utility of many things in life is rarely realized until it has been used in practice. many people have said they don't like Linux, they've read the books, they've looked under the hood. But unless they give it a good go, I just can't take their opinion seriously. The PHPClasses site content is made of packages contributed by developers that wrote their own packages. Those other packages often serve the same purposes as some of my packages. I am pro-choice. That is the spirit of the PHPClasses site. Everybody can publish their packages. Let the users be the judges of which are the best for whatever purposes. That is pure fair play. Is that a bad thing? I don't think so. I also would like to emphasize what I said above regarding the total lack of organization and cooperation of the PHP community. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You're either pro-choice with a myriad of choices to choose from, or you're anti-choice and want only one framework style. Get of the fence! Having standard API specifications does not prevent anybody to choose using solutions based on APIs that do not conform to any standard specifications. Furthermore I do not think that seem to understand the difference between an API specification and API implementation. J2EE is an API specification with many implementations from different vendors: Sun, IBM, Oracle, BEA, JBoss (this last one is Open Source). You can choose the implementation you want. There is plenty of choice to anybody. If you want to use a J2EE implementation to build your applications, otherwise you are free to use something else. It's seems people have chosen... and they've chosen not to bother with some kind of standard API. That's not to say one won't emerge, but it doesn't seem like it's important at this time. If there were standard specifications for packages and frameworks like there is in the Java world, maybe you would not have this discussion. There could be a consense to use the same standard API with eventual multiple implementations from different developers or vendors. Imagine if there would be only one PDBC (JDBC for PHP). Instead of that we have a
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 14:42 -0300, Manuel Lemos wrote: Hello, on 08/03/2006 09:25 AM Paul Scott said the following: The main thing in Manual's post that got me writing this in the first place was : Imagine if there would be only one PDBC (JDBC for PHP). Instead of that we have a never ending choice of PHP database abstraction layers that does not help newcoming developers that are lost and don't know what to use. I admit I have not expressed myself clearly. What I meant is not that people should be disallowed to implement alternative APIs, but rather that they should not feel the need to do it. I think you may be missing the point. Many people probably don't feel the need to create an alternative API, they may just feel the desire to do so. It's a great way to practice your skills, and in the end, you have a nice API that meets your needs. In the Java world, JDBC is the de facto standard because Java developers do not feel the need to develop other database APIs. That happens because JDBC is a standard API defined by several players from the SQL database world that sit together and defined a consensual API specification. In the PHP world there is no such organization nor the vision of the benefits of cooperating to define such standards. I already gave an example of the benefits of having such standard API specifications in the other comment to Rob. Almost all APIs can be wrapped when necessary. Hell, the PHP engine is in many cases just a wrapper around a C API. Cheers, Rob. -- .. | InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com | :: | An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting | | a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services | | such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn | | also provides an extremely flexible architecture for | | creating re-usable components quickly and easily. | `' -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
-Original Message- From: Manuel Lemos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 1:43 PM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion Hello, on 08/03/2006 09:25 AM Paul Scott said the following: The main thing in Manual's post that got me writing this in the first place was : Imagine if there would be only one PDBC (JDBC for PHP). Instead of that we have a never ending choice of PHP database abstraction layers that does not help newcoming developers that are lost and don't know what to use. I admit I have not expressed myself clearly. What I meant is not that people should be disallowed to implement alternative APIs, but rather that they should not feel the need to do it. In the Java world, JDBC is the de facto standard because Java developers do not feel the need to develop other database APIs. That happens because JDBC is a standard API defined by several players from the SQL database world that sit together and defined a consensual API specification. This is partially true because Java is owned and managed by SUN, and SUN is all about developing API's, both to ensure that it's own later work will work, and because it meant a better way for people to interface. And while you use JDBC as an example of something that won out, it isn't the only way to interface with Databases through Java, nor was it always accepted as the best way. In fact there is still a lot of discussion about other methods, and follow ons to JDBC. Also, JDBC doesn't eliminate the database specific variations entirely. You still have to deal with slight variances between specific databases, or incomplete JDBC implementations or JDBC implementations that provide additional functionality that isn't part of the spec. By the same token Pear_DB, and the follow ons were much like the early versino of JDBC. As is PDO in a lot of ways. The majority of the database specifics have been abstracted out and a general interface has emerged. Unlike in Java though, the PDO and Pear_(M)DB(2) families haven't settled yet(nor did JDBC overnight) but they are being developed by the community. And many people DO recognize the advantage of standards and basic API's and are working to develop exactly those kinds of things in their frameworks. Solar, as a simple example I have some experience with, is spending a lot of time thinking about how components fit togethor, how to allow for a common API while not requiring that you use Solar's classes or pieces to do things. Of course the web development world is a lot bigger than it was in the early days of JSP/J2EE. And PhP has a huge part of that so the community is larger and therefore the competing ideas is larger. But you could argue, how is PDO not a standard interface like JDBC? How was it not designed by the community and put out there for people to implement their own methods for it? In the PHP world there is no such organization nor the vision of the benefits of cooperating to define such standards. I already gave an example of the benefits of having such standard API specifications in the other comment to Rob. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Metastorage - Data object relational mapping layer generator http://www.metastorage.net/ PHP Classes - Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php James Kilbride -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
2006/8/3, Manuel Lemos [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hello, on 08/01/2006 01:35 PM Gabe said the following: What's the common consensus as to a solid PHP framework to use for application development? There seems to be a number of them out there, but I'm not sure which one's are the most robust, actively developed, secure, etc etc. Thoughts? There is no common consense. PHP development is not very well organized, like for instance in the Java world where several vendors can provide their own implementations of the same specification. This makes possible to use the same framework API from whatever vendor you prefer. In the PHP world all frameworks are incompatible, even when they attempt to implement similar feature sets. Anyway, you may want to read this more in depth reflection of the state of the PHP framework world and recommendations on how to pick what suits best for you: http://www.phpclasses.org/blog/post/52-Recommended-PHP-frameworks.html Sorry to intrude with my usual obnoxious behaviour, but this is starting to affect my self-esteem (what's left of it). Am I the only one who has a really hard time reading the blog posts in phpclasses.org? Everytime a reference to this blog is posted I lose track of the discussion, because I can't really grasp what Lemos is talking about. I'd like to make some some constructive criticism, not just to Lemos but to the community in general, since I think many of us need to improve our writing skills: 1 - Don't make lng boooring posts. 2 - Get to the point. Introduction are great when they are not two pages long. 3 - Stick to the topic. Or use appropiate titles. 4 - If the topic is inherently long, use distinguishable headers and subheaders. It's a pain in the ass to read a 5 pages long article that looks the same everywhere, with no easy way to know what is the subtopic of what are you reading now. 5 - Don't talk so much about your life! You can always make another blog for that... Unless your personal experience can bring an unique insight of the point you're trying to make. That's all folks. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos Metastorage - Data object relational mapping layer generator http://www.metastorage.net/ PHP Classes - Free ready to use OOP components written in PHP http://www.phpclasses.org/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
In my experience with the other frameworks (primarily Wasp, CakePHP,
Symfony, eZ Components, and Zend Framework), I've found that I was not
satisfied with the quantity of low-quality code they advocate. I have
a high standard for code quality, readability, maintainability, and
(more generally) semantics.
Because of this, I determined to build my own framework. This was a
few months ago, and Canvas[1] was the result of my labor. I produced
this framework while working on numerous projects at the university I
work at. This allowed me to build an application concurrently with the
framework and give it a good benchmark for usability, feature,
performance, etc.
Some of the features include pretty URLs and a fairly capable router,
a simplistic implementation of the ActiveRecord pattern (with a very
easy way to make adapters for your favorite flavor of RDBMS),
incorporation of Smarty for its templating, and usage of the MVC
pattern. (Of course, this list is hardly sorted by priority.)
A quick sample of using the ActiveRecord implementation:
class shoe extends Model {}
$shoe = new shoe();
$shoe-find_by_color('green')-delete();
$shoe-find_by_id(12);
$shoe-color = 'red';
$shoe-save();
$shoe-find_or_create_by_color('tangerine');
$shoe-find(array(where=array('color like :color or size
:size, color=pink, size=11)))-all();
Do check it out.
M.T.
1. http://c.anvas.es/
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Matt Todd wrote:
In my experience with the other frameworks (primarily Wasp, CakePHP,
Symfony, eZ Components, and Zend Framework), I've found that I was not
satisfied with the quantity of low-quality code they advocate. I have
a high standard for code quality, readability, maintainability, and
(more generally) semantics.
Because of this, I determined to build my own framework. This was a
few months ago, and Canvas[1] was the result of my labor. I produced
this framework while working on numerous projects at the university I
work at. This allowed me to build an application concurrently with the
framework and give it a good benchmark for usability, feature,
performance, etc.
Some of the features include pretty URLs and a fairly capable router,
a simplistic implementation of the ActiveRecord pattern (with a very
easy way to make adapters for your favorite flavor of RDBMS),
incorporation of Smarty for its templating, and usage of the MVC
pattern. (Of course, this list is hardly sorted by priority.)
A quick sample of using the ActiveRecord implementation:
class shoe extends Model {}
$shoe = new shoe();
$shoe-find_by_color('green')-delete();
$shoe-find_by_id(12);
$shoe-color = 'red';
$shoe-save();
$shoe-find_or_create_by_color('tangerine');
$shoe-find(array(where=array('color like :color or size
:size, color=pink, size=11)))-all();
Do check it out.
M.T.
1. http://c.anvas.es/
Please do not recommend stuff like this.
It is a funky framework!
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Jens Kleikamp wrote: Matt Todd wrote: Because of this, I determined to build my own framework. This was a few months ago, and Canvas[1] was the result of my labor. I produced this framework while working on numerous projects at the university I work at. This allowed me to build an application concurrently with the framework and give it a good benchmark for usability, feature, performance, etc. M.T. 1. http://c.anvas.es/ Please do not recommend stuff like this. It is a funky framework! What do you mean by funky? And why should he not recommend it? Jonathan -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Gabe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] What's the common consensus as to a solid PHP framework to use for application development? There seems to be a number of them out there, but I'm not sure which one's are the most robust, actively developed, secure, etc etc. Thoughts? If you want a rapid application development framework for administrative web applications then take a look at http://www.radicore.org It has dynamic menus, a role based access control system, audit logging without database triggers, a data dictionary, internationalisation, and a workflow engine. -- 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
[PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Tony Marston wrote: Gabe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] What's the common consensus as to a solid PHP framework to use for application development? There seems to be a number of them out there, but I'm not sure which one's are the most robust, actively developed, secure, etc etc. Thoughts? If you want a rapid application development framework for administrative web applications then take a look at http://www.radicore.org It has dynamic menus, a role based access control system, audit logging without database triggers, a data dictionary, internationalisation, and a workflow engine. Speaking about framework. Anybody is aware there is a very popular framework in Java called Spring which has pretty cool features like Inversion of Control, Dependency Injection etc. Anyone interested in porting Spring Framework to PHP? Regards, Karthikeyan B -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
karthikeyan balasubramanian wrote: Tony Marston wrote: Gabe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] What's the common consensus as to a solid PHP framework to use for application development? There seems to be a number of them out there, but I'm not sure which one's are the most robust, actively developed, secure, etc etc. Thoughts? If you want a rapid application development framework for administrative web applications then take a look at http://www.radicore.org It has dynamic menus, a role based access control system, audit logging without database triggers, a data dictionary, internationalisation, and a workflow engine. Speaking about framework. Anybody is aware there is a very popular framework in Java called Spring which has pretty cool features like Inversion of Control, Dependency Injection etc. Anyone interested in porting Spring Framework to PHP? I'll have it ready for you next week, what kind of license do you want? Regards, Karthikeyan B -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Jochem Maas wrote: Stut wrote: Jochem Maas wrote: I'll have it ready for you next week, what kind of license do you want? One license to kill to go please. 006.5 your lic is in the post. and while I'm at it can I port an obscure OS to the hardware of your choice during my lunch break? Been done: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-ports/2002/07/05/.html -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Jochem Maas wrote: I'll have it ready for you next week, what kind of license do you want? One license to kill to go please. -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
Stut wrote: Jochem Maas wrote: I'll have it ready for you next week, what kind of license do you want? One license to kill to go please. 006.5 your lic is in the post. and while I'm at it can I port an obscure OS to the hardware of your choice during my lunch break? -Stut -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Frameworks - Opinion
On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 15:51 +0300, karthikeyan balasubramanian wrote: Speaking about framework. Anybody is aware there is a very popular framework in Java called Spring which has pretty cool features like Inversion of Control, Dependency Injection etc. Sounds similar to the service system implemented in InterJinn. I implemented a lookup system allowing retrieval of service objects by custom names. This allows the mapping to be overriden with userland re-definitions which may or may not extend the original class. In this way, a developer can replace components and services without the need to change the code that makes use of such objects. The only caveat is that the override must at least support the methods and properties for the service or component being overriden. I have used this in many projects to extend the core components in InterJinn to provide customers with tailored functionality for their own specific needs. A simple example was overriding the mail service to dupe outgoing emails and store in an archive. It was as simple as extending the JinnMail class, overriding the send() method, and overriding the service registration. And voila, all existing code across the project automatically inherited the functionality, and the distribution code didn't need to be touched. Cheers, Rob. -- .. | InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com | :: | An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting | | a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services | | such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn | | also provides an extremely flexible architecture for | | creating re-usable components quickly and easily. | `' -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
