Re: [PHP] PHP framework
You can use the symfony. It's a great framework. Bye. Augusto Morais
Re: [PHP] PHP framework
On Sat, 2010-05-15 at 00:02 +0200, jfma...@electrex.pt wrote: > Greetings all! > > I new in template engines and frameworks, can you advice me the best php > framework. Do you all use smarty? I need something that does MVC and > templates, and specialy that has a lot of web resources to see other uers > experiences and problems. > > Regards, > > Joao > > CodeIgniter is probably the simplest to get to grips with as frameworks go. It's my understanding that Smarty is more of a templating engine than a framework. Thanks, Ash http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
Re: [PHP] php framework vs just php?
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 5:25 AM, paragasu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > honestly, i never used any framework to do my coding. > i look into few popular framework like cakePHP and codeIgiter. > I did learn the tutorial but still decide whether to use it on my next > project. > [snip!] > > i just wondering whether i am the only one thinking this way. > anyone out there still doing php without using framework? Any reusable code that solves a series of common problems, addresses common issues, or reduces the necessity of writing common code for an application is a framework. On one hand, I would say that I stay away from frameworks, but on the other hand, I'd say that I don't. It's easily explained: I've created my own framework(s) over the years, and I don't use prefabricated ones written by someone else. And since I never really liked buzzwords, I've never considered calling my code core a "framework". So by pure semantics alone, no - I don't use a bloody framework (or a clean one either). -- Dedicated Servers - Intel 2.4GHz w/2TB bandwidth/mo. starting at just $59.99/mo. with no contract! Dedicated servers, VPS, and hosting from $2.50/mo. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] php framework vs just php?
On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 20:49 +0800, paragasu wrote: > > You get two kinds of framework in PHP IMHO - the Glue frameworks (like > > Chisimba, CakePHP etc) and the component frameworks (like PEAR, Zend > > Framework etc). > > > > personally i prefer to call "component framework" as "code library" =) Well since I've plugged my InterJinn "framework" into the likes of Drupal, EZ Systems, Joomla, osCommerce and a myriad of craptastic custom/legacy/smarty systems... I could easily call it a "code library" too. Every aspect about my "framework" is optional. If I don't want/need the scaffolding offered by some of the modules then I don't have to use them. I guess some frameworks though do force you into their single way of doing things. 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] php framework vs just php?
On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 14:41 +0200, Paul Scott wrote: > On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 13:34 +0100, Richard Heyes wrote: > > Absolutely. Personally I use a lot of disparate libraries, a lot of them > > from PEAR. Doing this I've never found the need or the inclination to > > use a "framework". > > > > But that is kind of a framework! > > You get two kinds of framework in PHP IMHO - the Glue frameworks (like > Chisimba, CakePHP etc) and the component frameworks (like PEAR, Zend > Framework etc). > > What you are describing is simply a component framework. Just because > you choose not to call it a framework, does not mean that it is not a > framework. Yep, PEAR certainly is a framework *lol*. 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] php framework vs just php?
> You get two kinds of framework in PHP IMHO - the Glue frameworks (like > Chisimba, CakePHP etc) and the component frameworks (like PEAR, Zend > Framework etc). > personally i prefer to call "component framework" as "code library" =)
Re: [PHP] php framework vs just php?
On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 13:34 +0100, Richard Heyes wrote: > Absolutely. Personally I use a lot of disparate libraries, a lot of them > from PEAR. Doing this I've never found the need or the inclination to > use a "framework". > But that is kind of a framework! You get two kinds of framework in PHP IMHO - the Glue frameworks (like Chisimba, CakePHP etc) and the component frameworks (like PEAR, Zend Framework etc). What you are describing is simply a component framework. Just because you choose not to call it a framework, does not mean that it is not a framework. --Paul All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer http://www.uwc.ac.za/portal/public/portal_services/disclaimer.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] php framework vs just php?
i just wondering whether i am the only one thinking this way. anyone out there still doing php without using framework? Absolutely. Personally I use a lot of disparate libraries, a lot of them from PEAR. Doing this I've never found the need or the inclination to use a "framework". -- Richard Heyes ++ | Access SSH with a Windows mapped drive | |http://www.phpguru.org/sftpdrive| ++ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] php framework vs just php?
At 5:25 PM +0800 4/22/08, paragasu wrote: i just wondering whether i am the only one thinking this way. anyone out there still doing php without using framework? I don't use a framework either. However, I do have a collection of routines (many stolen from Rob, David et al on this list) that I use for specific needs. That collection grows daily. You might try what I do, which is to review every problem presented on this list and make a demo of the solution. It's a lot of work, but you'll build a library of stuff that you can use over and over. 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] php framework vs just php?
Robert Cummings wrote: i just wondering whether i am the only one thinking this way. anyone out there still doing php without using framework? There's plenty of people out there who don't believe in frameworks. Nothing wrong with that-- to each their own. Only thing I would ask you is whether you ever re-use any of your own code from one project to the next? If you do, then chances are you're slowly creating your own framework. And if you don't, well I probably wouldn't hire you because obviously you do everything from scratch every time and are wasting the client's time/money. Of cause it is even more fun trying to move customers from a framework that you selected 6 years ago to your current much more practical framework which you realised was a much better base a couple of years later ;) Because the old clunky framework works, its taken years to get a much more advance framework even considered :( But we are slowly getting there ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] php framework vs just php?
> My clients benefit downstream whenever I add to my framework. A problem > solved two years ago is a problem still solved today, and I don't need > to copy and paste into their project and thus maintain multiple versions > of the same solution. i am quite new in php. i only spent about 3 year playing with PHP. And what you just said about the 2 years old code still solved problem today. well it is true. but i have a different opinion based on my own experience. i always found better solutions for old problem. For example, during PHP4 age, i have to use XMLParser class (http://www.criticaldevelopment.net/xml/) to parse xml file, while in PHP5.. there is SimpleXML. And another example is mysqli prepared query. Framework is complicated to me. It is easier to work with just php and it is more straight forward. I have to dig deep into the framework documentation because few hack to make it be able to work on all PHP version (backward compatible) and AFAIK, no many framework out there support mysqli prepared query (maybe it does, but it takes some time before someone implement thus function without breaking the code backward compatiblity). Backward compatible framework make the code so damn hard to debug and it really hurt eyes to see many cryptic code. And of course it takes some time to understand what a line of code does (fair enough since the framework coder takes years to create, Newbie like me will take twice the time, to understand and modify that framework) But, i agree, for productivity framework saves a lot of time. Then again, it is easier and faster to use the drag-and-drop php code feature in macromedia mx (no need to learn html and not too much php).. i still can't convince myself to use framework ;(
Re: [PHP] php framework vs just php?
On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 17:25 +0800, paragasu wrote: > honestly, i never used any framework to do my coding. > i look into few popular framework like cakePHP and codeIgiter. > I did learn the tutorial but still decide whether to use it on my next > project. > > the thing is, i already develop few working library. no matter how hard i > look into it. i always find it is easier or simpler to work with just php > code and it work just fine. > simple code and i think faster than using complicated php framework. > > i target my code to use specific server configuration. the only advantages > of using framework > is cross server version (i don't need it). since everyone out there talking > about framework. > i still prefer using just php. > > i just wondering whether i am the only one thinking this way. > anyone out there still doing php without using framework? There's plenty of people out there who don't believe in frameworks. Nothing wrong with that-- to each their own. Only thing I would ask you is whether you ever re-use any of your own code from one project to the next? If you do, then chances are you're slowly creating your own framework. And if you don't, well I probably wouldn't hire you because obviously you do everything from scratch every time and are wasting the client's time/money. My clients benefit downstream whenever I add to my framework. A problem solved two years ago is a problem still solved today, and I don't need to copy and paste into their project and thus maintain multiple versions of the same solution. I can just use the original solution since it's inherently part of their project. I use a lazy system for loading modules/components/services so having extra crap in my framework doesn't have an impact on run-time. I don't use autoload, and I only use includes/requires if I'm extending a class. Complexity is a mixed deal... I would probably find your system far more complex since I've abstracted away most of the complexity. Sure there are rules, but only a few and even they are flexible. 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] php framework vs just php?
Umm hell yes? I don't use frameworks, its an awsome thing, but I don't like them. But if I'm not using any framework at all, the least I do is writing the application object-oriented'ly. Regards, Nitsan On 22/04/2008, paragasu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > honestly, i never used any framework to do my coding. > i look into few popular framework like cakePHP and codeIgiter. > I did learn the tutorial but still decide whether to use it on my next > project. > > the thing is, i already develop few working library. no matter how hard i > look into it. i always find it is easier or simpler to work with just php > code and it work just fine. > simple code and i think faster than using complicated php framework. > > i target my code to use specific server configuration. the only > advantages > of using framework > is cross server version (i don't need it). since everyone out there > talking > about framework. > i still prefer using just php. > > i just wondering whether i am the only one thinking this way. > anyone out there still doing php without using framework? >
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework alternative ...
I second that, and if anyone in the know cares to comment on whether: a. php will actually implement static late binding Mike Lively gives and update on the late static binding patch submitted to the internals on his blog http://www.digitalsandwich.com/archives/53-Late-Static-Binding-in-PHP.html -- life is a game... so have fun. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework alternative ...
Robert Cummings wrote: On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 19:23, Jochem Maas wrote: Robert Cummings wrote: I must say that I have questions regarding the 'real' reasons behind The most plausible real reason is to give Zend's name to a framework that will possibly rally interest behind a single framework rather than the multitude currently in existence. it will probably work more or less since they will probably be packaged with PHP (unless they are going to commercialize it -- in which case it will probably gain moderate corporate uptake and be JAFW :). development of the ZF and also question (given the current state/contents of ZF) whether it's not destined to be JAFW ... not that that's necessarily a bad thing (plenty of code already in ZF that serves as an excellent primer for how to write decent [OO] code if nothing else :-) given your InterJinn codebase you no doubt have an opinion about ZF too, dare to give your take on it? My InterJinn framework works exceptionally well for me and for my customers. this really is a big point: namely that regardless of the quality, flexibility, strength, etc of any given framwork one has to spend alot of time either writing it or learning how to use it. a fact that stops me from getting intimate with quite a few frameworks (lack of time :-( ). it was never wildly adopted, but then the free license is probably overly restrictive and the philosophy behind it isn't your run of the mill OOP (I use a service registry system). Regardless of what happens, InterJinn has one of the most non-intrusive footprints when it comes to general PHP code. I've had little trouble hooking it into or wrapping it around other frameworks and codebases. Additionally with the way it processes templates, I've been known to wrap other frameworks' templates and source code within TemplateJinn so that I can get at the custom tag functionality (I don't lose out on processing time since TemplateJinn compiles templates to PHP source, and compiled templates don't need to include InterJinn :) Either way, for me, ZF will be JAFW. If it has good stuff, I'll use it, I'll wrap it, I'll 0wn it -- but that's how any chunk of code should work :D lol. Cheers, Rob. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework alternative ...
Chris Shiflett wrote: Jochem Maas wrote: a. php will actually implement static late binding b. Zend Framework's 'DataObject' class will make use of said late binding to do cool things like Person::findAll( $myFilter ) with out having to actually implement a findAll method in the Person class I have read indications that this will eventually happen. For example, read Mike's comment here (scroll down): http://blog.joshuaeichorn.com/archives/2006/01/09/zactiverecord-cant-work/ From my perspective, it's not a big deal. What is a big deal to me is whether ZF will have an ORM solution at all. At the moment, it does not. I'd second that also .. then again I have an ORM based (only) on FirebirdDB which could really have done with late state binding ... 2.5 years ago ;-) I must say that I have questions regarding the 'real' reasons behind development of the ZF and also question (given the current state/contents of ZF) whether it's not destined to be JAFW I can only speculate like anyone else, but I feel like Zend's motivation is based on several things: 1. It wants PHP to remain competitive among J2EE and .NET. PHP's growth has been impressive for many years, but it seems like it's just now penetrating the "enterprise" companies. (Enterprise basically means large companies with more money than technical competence.) 2. Its customers have been demanding a supported component library and framework. Zend needed to develop this, so it could either choose the closed source or open source development model. It chose the latter. 3. Its customers demand IP accountability, because integrating projects with PHP is vastly different from using the PHP engine in terms of IP concerns. Thus, the CLA. It may be JAFW (just another framework, for anyone feeling left out), and in a way, I think Zend will consider that to be a failure. Given its ability to be used with other frameworks and/or component libraries, I think the ZF is good for PHP as a whole, regardless of whether it becomes any sort of standard. JAFW isn't so bad. :-) thanks for you words Chris, I certainly agree with you that whatever the details, politics, etc ZF is most likely going to become a positive inclusion to the world of php. Chris -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework alternative ...
Jochem Maas wrote: a. php will actually implement static late binding b. Zend Framework's 'DataObject' class will make use of said late binding to do cool things like Person::findAll( $myFilter ) with out having to actually implement a findAll method in the Person class I have read indications that this will eventually happen. For example, read Mike's comment here (scroll down): http://blog.joshuaeichorn.com/archives/2006/01/09/zactiverecord-cant-work/ From my perspective, it's not a big deal. What is a big deal to me is whether ZF will have an ORM solution at all. At the moment, it does not. I must say that I have questions regarding the 'real' reasons behind development of the ZF and also question (given the current state/contents of ZF) whether it's not destined to be JAFW I can only speculate like anyone else, but I feel like Zend's motivation is based on several things: 1. It wants PHP to remain competitive among J2EE and .NET. PHP's growth has been impressive for many years, but it seems like it's just now penetrating the "enterprise" companies. (Enterprise basically means large companies with more money than technical competence.) 2. Its customers have been demanding a supported component library and framework. Zend needed to develop this, so it could either choose the closed source or open source development model. It chose the latter. 3. Its customers demand IP accountability, because integrating projects with PHP is vastly different from using the PHP engine in terms of IP concerns. Thus, the CLA. It may be JAFW (just another framework, for anyone feeling left out), and in a way, I think Zend will consider that to be a failure. Given its ability to be used with other frameworks and/or component libraries, I think the ZF is good for PHP as a whole, regardless of whether it becomes any sort of standard. JAFW isn't so bad. :-) Chris -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework alternative ...
On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 19:23, Jochem Maas wrote: > Robert Cummings wrote: > > I must say that I have questions regarding the 'real' reasons behind The most plausible real reason is to give Zend's name to a framework that will possibly rally interest behind a single framework rather than the multitude currently in existence. it will probably work more or less since they will probably be packaged with PHP (unless they are going to commercialize it -- in which case it will probably gain moderate corporate uptake and be JAFW :). > development of the ZF and also question (given the current state/contents of > ZF) > whether it's not destined to be JAFW ... not that that's necessarily a bad > thing (plenty of code already in ZF that serves as an excellent primer for > how to write decent [OO] code if nothing else :-) > > given your InterJinn codebase you no doubt have an opinion about ZF too, > dare to give your take on it? My InterJinn framework works exceptionally well for me and for my customers. it was never wildly adopted, but then the free license is probably overly restrictive and the philosophy behind it isn't your run of the mill OOP (I use a service registry system). Regardless of what happens, InterJinn has one of the most non-intrusive footprints when it comes to general PHP code. I've had little trouble hooking it into or wrapping it around other frameworks and codebases. Additionally with the way it processes templates, I've been known to wrap other frameworks' templates and source code within TemplateJinn so that I can get at the custom tag functionality (I don't lose out on processing time since TemplateJinn compiles templates to PHP source, and compiled templates don't need to include InterJinn :) Either way, for me, ZF will be JAFW. If it has good stuff, I'll use it, I'll wrap it, I'll 0wn it -- but that's how any chunk of code should work :D 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] PHP Framework alternative ...
Robert Cummings wrote: On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 16:21, Jochem Maas wrote: no question here but for anyone wanting a totally different take on php frameworks and some killer code examples take a look at this: http://toys.lerdorf.com/archives/38-The-no-framework-PHP-MVC-framework.html Rasmus is just suggesting you build your own framework instead of using someone elses framework. That way you have the ideal framework for your own needs by the time you have sufficient projects. That's how most of us got started on our framework *lol*. Nothing new to see here... just word mashing to make you think it's not a framework. oh I got all that alright, I just chucked in the word 'framework' because: a. I saw a couple of general questions regarding frameworks the last couple of days/weeks. b. it's garanteed to stir the pot so to speak ;-) Out of curiosity, I'm curious where Rasmus stands on Zend's framework? Or is he not a part of that process? I second that, and if anyone in the know cares to comment on whether: a. php will actually implement static late binding b. Zend Framework's 'DataObject' class will make use of said late binding to do cool things like Person::findAll( $myFilter ) with out having to actually implement a findAll method in the Person class (i.e. using a single generic findAll method defined in whatever DataObject class Person is derived from ). ... please do :-) I must say that I have questions regarding the 'real' reasons behind development of the ZF and also question (given the current state/contents of ZF) whether it's not destined to be JAFW ... not that that's necessarily a bad thing (plenty of code already in ZF that serves as an excellent primer for how to write decent [OO] code if nothing else :-) given your InterJinn codebase you no doubt have an opinion about ZF too, dare to give your take on it? Cheers, Rob. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework alternative ...
On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 16:21, Jochem Maas wrote: > no question here but for anyone wanting a totally different take > on php frameworks and some killer code examples > > take a look at this: > http://toys.lerdorf.com/archives/38-The-no-framework-PHP-MVC-framework.html Rasmus is just suggesting you build your own framework instead of using someone elses framework. That way you have the ideal framework for your own needs by the time you have sufficient projects. That's how most of us got started on our framework *lol*. Nothing new to see here... just word mashing to make you think it's not a framework. Out of curiosity, I'm curious where Rasmus stands on Zend's framework? Or is he not a part of that process? 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] PHP Framework
On Tuesday 15 November 2005 16:09, Richard Davey wrote: > > I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that > > there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got > > any experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some > > suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas. > > I'll add a criteria to your list (which nearly all the frameworks out > there lack) - *DOCUMENTATION* > > There are so many recent PHP apps out there in the wild (not just > frameworks) that have virtually no real, solid, *useful* documentation > for them. Please, take a look on ZNF before saying that ;). One of the first goal of this framework is to have a very understandable documentation. Is one hundred of pages and contains, among other things, lot of UML diagrams. http://znf.zeronotice.com Best regards. -- Alessandro 'Aronnax' Rossini web -> www.aronnax.it e-mail -> [EMAIL PROTECTED] icq -> 2442698 ZeroNotice IT Solutions -> www.zeronotice.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework
Robert Cummings wrote: On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 09:54, Yonatan Ben-Nes wrote: Hi All, I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got any experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas. The framework need to achieve the following goals (Doesn't have to be all of them): 1. Reusability of codes as components. 2. OO. 3. PHP 5. 4. Code & logic should be seperated from design (MVC and such..). 5. Easy to use & learn. 6. Extreme flexibility to handle also special requirements. 7. Easy usage of PEAR. 8. Should have a good living community. (I don't want to choose a project which will fall in a year...) 5. InterJinn - http://www.interjinn.com/about/index.phtml Since I'm the InterJinn guy :) I'll comment on your list of reqs... 1. Re-usability is more a symptom of the developer, but InterJinn does generally provide a nice design for creating small chunks of highly re-usable and adaptble code. 2. InterJinn is 99% OO except for a few functions that are used mostly by the framework itself. A list of all services, components, classes, and functions can be viewed here. http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/index.phtml Unfortunately as mentioned by Richard Davey older stuff isn't well documented as far as the API goes, although there's plenty of documentation about services in general. 3. InterJinn was NOT written to exploit PHP5 in particular, however it has been updated to be cleanly compatible (though I haven't checked with the most recent version of PHP5). That said such updates are usually fairly trivial due to it's clean nature :) 4. Modules are comprised of components, components implement the MVC paradigm. The template engine was specifically designed with said modules/components for easy interfacing with the data. Unlike Smarty, the code never touches templates, but rather makes data available, that a template may or may not use. Modules and components are imported/bound by templates, not the other way around. 5. InterJinn is not particularly easy to learn, but once you do it is easy to use -- although your mileage may vary since a lot of the "easy to use" people out there are cut and paste goons. 6. Very flexible with highly modular and customizable service/modules. Services are akin to cross application libraries which are registered in the project configuration. This makes it possible to share often used code across the application, with the exception that since the service is requested by registered name it is easy to drop in functionally different (yet API equivalent) replacements. To date I've patched in support for InterJinn into existing legacy web applications and in some cases into existing dirty frameworks like the eZ framework system with no problem. In these cases InterJinn is treated like a drop in super library. 7. PEAR is a library of it's own, there's no reason why it couldn't be easily used anywhere. InterJinn especially makes consideration for other libraries by having an extremely small footprint in the globals names space. Additionally classes and functions are named such that they generally don't conflict. With respect to PEAR interJinn also provides a wrapper for the PEAR:DB API for it's own database service which can act as a drop in replacement. http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.service.PearDbManager.phtml 8. InterJinn does NOT have a good community *lol*. But it's not about to fail since I'm using it actively with several clients and for my own projects. Although I must say, releases are slow, but then I usually use the most up to date snapshots since I know they are more stable than the last release version, as well as having many more undocumented features. Either way if you decide to try it out more I'm always available to answer questions. Feel free to email me directly. The Future... While the API documentation sucks for most of the existing code, future service/components/whatever will be documented nicely. For instance I recently found myself working with a lot of XML feeds and so I knocked up my own SimpleXML service to simplify the tedium of working with XML. This illustrates how future code (and slowly but surely older code) will be documented: http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.service.JinnSimpleXml.phtml You can click on the "Implemented via Class JinnSimpleXml" for full class API documentation (or click the following:) http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.class.JinnSimpleXml.phtml Currently I am working towards adding a convenient Javascript integration system that will allow to include javascript modules via a system similar to including InterJinn services. This will have full XmlHttpRequest support (Ajax if you must *puke*). You can view deta
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 09:54, Yonatan Ben-Nes wrote: > Hi All, > > I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that > there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got any > experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some > suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas. > > The framework need to achieve the following goals (Doesn't have to be > all of them): > 1. Reusability of codes as components. > 2. OO. > 3. PHP 5. > 4. Code & logic should be seperated from design (MVC and such..). > 5. Easy to use & learn. > 6. Extreme flexibility to handle also special requirements. > 7. Easy usage of PEAR. > 8. Should have a good living community. (I don't want to choose a > project which will fall in a year...) > 5. InterJinn - http://www.interjinn.com/about/index.phtml Since I'm the InterJinn guy :) I'll comment on your list of reqs... 1. Re-usability is more a symptom of the developer, but InterJinn does generally provide a nice design for creating small chunks of highly re-usable and adaptble code. 2. InterJinn is 99% OO except for a few functions that are used mostly by the framework itself. A list of all services, components, classes, and functions can be viewed here. http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/index.phtml Unfortunately as mentioned by Richard Davey older stuff isn't well documented as far as the API goes, although there's plenty of documentation about services in general. 3. InterJinn was NOT written to exploit PHP5 in particular, however it has been updated to be cleanly compatible (though I haven't checked with the most recent version of PHP5). That said such updates are usually fairly trivial due to it's clean nature :) 4. Modules are comprised of components, components implement the MVC paradigm. The template engine was specifically designed with said modules/components for easy interfacing with the data. Unlike Smarty, the code never touches templates, but rather makes data available, that a template may or may not use. Modules and components are imported/bound by templates, not the other way around. 5. InterJinn is not particularly easy to learn, but once you do it is easy to use -- although your mileage may vary since a lot of the "easy to use" people out there are cut and paste goons. 6. Very flexible with highly modular and customizable service/modules. Services are akin to cross application libraries which are registered in the project configuration. This makes it possible to share often used code across the application, with the exception that since the service is requested by registered name it is easy to drop in functionally different (yet API equivalent) replacements. To date I've patched in support for InterJinn into existing legacy web applications and in some cases into existing dirty frameworks like the eZ framework system with no problem. In these cases InterJinn is treated like a drop in super library. 7. PEAR is a library of it's own, there's no reason why it couldn't be easily used anywhere. InterJinn especially makes consideration for other libraries by having an extremely small footprint in the globals names space. Additionally classes and functions are named such that they generally don't conflict. With respect to PEAR interJinn also provides a wrapper for the PEAR:DB API for it's own database service which can act as a drop in replacement. http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.service.PearDbManager.phtml 8. InterJinn does NOT have a good community *lol*. But it's not about to fail since I'm using it actively with several clients and for my own projects. Although I must say, releases are slow, but then I usually use the most up to date snapshots since I know they are more stable than the last release version, as well as having many more undocumented features. Either way if you decide to try it out more I'm always available to answer questions. Feel free to email me directly. The Future... While the API documentation sucks for most of the existing code, future service/components/whatever will be documented nicely. For instance I recently found myself working with a lot of XML feeds and so I knocked up my own SimpleXML service to simplify the tedium of working with XML. This illustrates how future code (and slowly but surely older code) will be documented: http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.service.JinnSimpleXml.phtml You can click on the "Implemented via Class JinnSimpleXml" for full class API documentation (or click the following:) http://www.interjinn.com/jinnDoc/interjinn.class.JinnSimpleXml.phtml Currently I am working towards adding a convenient Javascript integration system that will allow to include javascript modules via a system similar to including InterJinn services. This will have full XmlHttpRequest support (Ajax if you must *puke*). You can view de
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework
Richard Davey wrote: Hi Yonatan, Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 2:54:27 PM, you wrote: I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got any experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas. The framework need to achieve the following goals (Doesn't have to be all of them): I'll add a criteria to your list (which nearly all the frameworks out there lack) - *DOCUMENTATION* There are so many recent PHP apps out there in the wild (not just frameworks) that have virtually no real, solid, *useful* documentation for them. The vast majority of PEAR components suffer from this, lots of the frameworks have virtually no good documentation at all, some of the blog apps, the wiki apps, etc etc etc. Stick your finger anywhere in the PHP pie and you'll hit a cherry, but more often than not have no help at all on how to consume it, without ripping the thing apart. I'm sure this isn't unique to PHP, but it gets my goat :) We've got security consortiums, framework groups, component repositories, class files a go-go - maybe it was time someone started a PHP Documentation Group! Err, apologies for diversifying from your original thread a bit. Cheers, Rich Don't be sorry it's actually a good criteria :) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework
Hi Yonatan, Tuesday, November 15, 2005, 2:54:27 PM, you wrote: > I want to start using a framework to my future sites and I saw that > there are quite alot of options out there at the net, if anyone got > any experience with frameworks I would really like to receive some > suggestions, recommenditions and even ideas. > The framework need to achieve the following goals (Doesn't have to > be all of them): I'll add a criteria to your list (which nearly all the frameworks out there lack) - *DOCUMENTATION* There are so many recent PHP apps out there in the wild (not just frameworks) that have virtually no real, solid, *useful* documentation for them. The vast majority of PEAR components suffer from this, lots of the frameworks have virtually no good documentation at all, some of the blog apps, the wiki apps, etc etc etc. Stick your finger anywhere in the PHP pie and you'll hit a cherry, but more often than not have no help at all on how to consume it, without ripping the thing apart. I'm sure this isn't unique to PHP, but it gets my goat :) We've got security consortiums, framework groups, component repositories, class files a go-go - maybe it was time someone started a PHP Documentation Group! Err, apologies for diversifying from your original thread a bit. Cheers, Rich -- Zend Certified Engineer PHP Development Services http://www.corephp.co.uk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP framework
On 24/10/2004, at 4:04 AM, Igor wrote: I need to develop an PHP/MySql application (about 20 db tables and 70 screens). I was wandering if there is a solid framework out there that could help development. Also, I would appreciate any recommendations for books/docs on good development practices and php app. architecture. Frameworks ultimately come down to personal coding preferences and the time needed for the learning curve before development can begin. My favourite pattern in MVC (Model-View-Controller), and there are a number of PHP MVC frameworks out there already. If you've got the time to invest, I'd start experimenting with the current offerings, then think about how you can either contribute to those, or build your on that works the way you want to work. Personally, I built the beginnings of my own framework in a single night, and it does EXACTLY what I need it to do, but this is after years of learning about the way I code, studying MVC, and learning the way others have done things. Essentially I condensed 5+ years of PHP knowledge into a few hours of programming. I've been doing a LOT of reading and research into MVC lately, and found Ruby on Rails, a Ruby implementation of MVC which is really inspiring stuff... by sticking to some nice naming conventions, and using reflection instead of configuration, you get a lot of code for "free". Of course, it's not PHP though :) Anyway, start researching MVC, and see if it can work for you, or inspire your own framework. http://www.google.com/search?q=PHP+MVC&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 http://www.rubyonrails.org/show/HomePage http://media.nextangle.com/rails/rails_setup.mov (22 meg RoR set-up movie which would inspire anyone!) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MVC http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?DontRepeatYourself http://www.phppatterns.com/index.php/article/articleview/19/1/1/ I could go on and on :) Justin -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP framework
Igor, the problem on using a framework is that you have to learn it before you take advantage of its features, I mean you must consider the learning curve in your time schedule. There are pretty good frameworks out there, but each one with your pros and cons, and with your own goals, I mean, a strong and reliable framework doesn´t mean it is extensible or even template driven, or also even easy to learn. I developed my own framework, witch I am using on almost all my projects (course I won´t kill a fly with a hammer!) for one year and half, and still on version 0.5dev! :) Some of then: http://www.zope.org http://www.fusebox.org http://www.mojavi.org http://www.binarycloud.com http://www.eZpublish.com http://amb.sourceforge.net http://www.phpmvc.net http://phrame.itsd.ttu.edu http://www.horde.org Best Regards, Bruno B B Magalhães On Oct 23, 2004, at 4:04 PM, Igor wrote: I need to develop an PHP/MySql application (about 20 db tables and 70 screens). I was wandering if there is a solid framework out there that could help development. Also, I would appreciate any recommendations for books/docs on good development practices and php app. architecture. Thanks! Igor -- 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] php framework
Modified to be object oriented and support xml/xslt. Jordan S. Jones wrote: Where I work, we use a heavily modified version of Fusebox. We like it. Jordan S. Jones Lai, Kenny wrote: just wanted a general idea on what kind of PHP framework everyone is using.. i've heard of pear, and interjinn.. is there a preference or distinct advantage that a particular framework has in comparison to one another? thanks in advance, kenny -- I am nothing but a poor boy. Please Donate.. https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=list%40racistnames.com&item_name=Jordan+S.+Jones&no_note=1&tax=0¤cy_code=USD -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] php framework
Where I work, we use a heavily modified version of Fusebox. We like it. Jordan S. Jones Lai, Kenny wrote: just wanted a general idea on what kind of PHP framework everyone is using.. i've heard of pear, and interjinn.. is there a preference or distinct advantage that a particular framework has in comparison to one another? thanks in advance, kenny -- I am nothing but a poor boy. Please Donate.. https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=list%40racistnames.com&item_name=Jordan+S.+Jones&no_note=1&tax=0¤cy_code=USD -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] php framework
> just wanted a general idea on what kind of PHP framework everyone is using.. > i've heard of pear, and interjinn.. is there a preference or distinct > advantage that a particular framework has in comparison to one another? Check the archives...this has been touched on numerous times in the past couple of months... -- Ray -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework
"Maxim Maletsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I agree, I'd go for Smarty. Though, on the other hand, I often see no > reason for using the Templates of any kind. Why? Because you stil get to > hard code the tags in it. Not making that much sense as many think. You hi, give a shot to TemplateTamer, in it looping controls, conditionals, reside in php logic files where they belong not in the html template. rush -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework
I agree, I'd go for Smarty. Though, on the other hand, I often see no reason for using the Templates of any kind. Why? Because you stil get to hard code the tags in it. Not making that much sense as many think. You might simply create a framework by appending the genuine PHP files where HTML code resides and PHP code includes the variables. This will be faster and native. Will also do the necessary thing: separate code (*) from layout(**). (*) Code - the actual functionalty (**) Layout - HTML, JavaScript orwhatever that receives the PHP variables and places them within the layout. -- Maxim Maletsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Danny Shepherd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote... : > Well, Yahoo! have moved/are moving to Smarty and they get a few million > views a day. > > The killer part with smarty is that it converts the Smarty tags, in your > template, to real PHP code - that's what makes it so fast. It's also very > easy to extend. > > Danny. > > > - Original Message - > From: "John Wards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 2:41 PM > Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP Framework > > > On Monday 03 Feb 2003 2:01 pm, karthikeyan.balasubramanian wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I finally decided to upgrade my PHP. Just want to know your thoughts on > > which Framework is the best with a clear seperation of content from > > presentation. > > > > Please let me know which do you think is the best and why? > > I use SMARTY (smarty.php.net) and think its the dogs bolxs. > > Its fast, its easy to use. The template pasing language is simple. > > My site gets somewhere in the region on 100,000 p.v.s a day and it copes > easily. > > But, there is a pertender lurking in the shadows. > > phorum.org, yes its a message board. But phorum 5 which is not pre alpha yet > has its own built in templating system which I thnk with a bit of tweaking > could be used as a full blown templating system. > > John > > -- > 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 > -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework
How does Smarty compare with PHP FAST Template?? - Original Message - From: "Danny Shepherd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 2:51 PM Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP Framework > Well, Yahoo! have moved/are moving to Smarty and they get a few million > views a day. > > The killer part with smarty is that it converts the Smarty tags, in your > template, to real PHP code - that's what makes it so fast. It's also very > easy to extend. > > Danny. > > > - Original Message - > From: "John Wards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 2:41 PM > Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP Framework > > > On Monday 03 Feb 2003 2:01 pm, karthikeyan.balasubramanian wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I finally decided to upgrade my PHP. Just want to know your thoughts on > > which Framework is the best with a clear seperation of content from > > presentation. > > > > Please let me know which do you think is the best and why? > > I use SMARTY (smarty.php.net) and think its the dogs bolxs. > > Its fast, its easy to use. The template pasing language is simple. > > My site gets somewhere in the region on 100,000 p.v.s a day and it copes > easily. > > But, there is a pertender lurking in the shadows. > > phorum.org, yes its a message board. But phorum 5 which is not pre alpha yet > has its own built in templating system which I thnk with a bit of tweaking > could be used as a full blown templating system. > > John > > -- > 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 > -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] PHP Framework
Well, Yahoo! have moved/are moving to Smarty and they get a few million views a day. The killer part with smarty is that it converts the Smarty tags, in your template, to real PHP code - that's what makes it so fast. It's also very easy to extend. Danny. - Original Message - From: "John Wards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 2:41 PM Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP Framework On Monday 03 Feb 2003 2:01 pm, karthikeyan.balasubramanian wrote: > Hi All, > > I finally decided to upgrade my PHP. Just want to know your thoughts on > which Framework is the best with a clear seperation of content from > presentation. > > Please let me know which do you think is the best and why? I use SMARTY (smarty.php.net) and think its the dogs bolxs. Its fast, its easy to use. The template pasing language is simple. My site gets somewhere in the region on 100,000 p.v.s a day and it copes easily. But, there is a pertender lurking in the shadows. phorum.org, yes its a message board. But phorum 5 which is not pre alpha yet has its own built in templating system which I thnk with a bit of tweaking could be used as a full blown templating system. John -- 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] PHP Framework
On Monday 03 Feb 2003 2:01 pm, karthikeyan.balasubramanian wrote: > Hi All, > > I finally decided to upgrade my PHP. Just want to know your thoughts on > which Framework is the best with a clear seperation of content from > presentation. > > Please let me know which do you think is the best and why? I use SMARTY (smarty.php.net) and think its the dogs bolxs. Its fast, its easy to use. The template pasing language is simple. My site gets somewhere in the region on 100,000 p.v.s a day and it copes easily. But, there is a pertender lurking in the shadows. phorum.org, yes its a message board. But phorum 5 which is not pre alpha yet has its own built in templating system which I thnk with a bit of tweaking could be used as a full blown templating system. John -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
