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: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
Yes, I absolutely agree that Rasmus is awesome and his accomplishments are far and beyond amazing, but I'm saying that I think that Rasmus is motivated to stay true to PHP's philosophies and not be willing to rethink them: that is what I meant by that. In no way am I saying that Rasmus doesn't DESERVE to align your theories with or your ideas with, but I think that he may be too vested in PHP and what he has been doing to realign himself. But of course, that is just conjecture. I'm just saying that I think he has vested interest and will be least of all willing to make the shift in thought (even if he did think it held some merit). Again, I in no way meant any offense to Rasmus, and I stand by that. M.T. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
There's nothing wrong with staying true to the philosophy at all, I just think that it may well be detrimental in the end. And that is what I said in the (toilet)paper, that there will be (emphasis on the eventuality, not on the present actuality) a time that PHP will become the old stuff because it did not evolve with the philosophies. These philosophies are new and I can understand thinking that it's hype, but it's important to recognize it as legitimate. Agile Development (and the broader term Web 2.0) is, right now, the bleeding edge of development, and I and many others see it as the future of development philosophies. I'm not saying that Rasmus can't see, but that he will easily choose to stay with how he sees the forest – understandable as I choose to stay with what I see, but I think he has a lot invested in his view and may not open up as easily. To Stut: Honestly, I'd love to see basic variables be objects, as models of real world data with properties for the data such as a $number->length or $word->as_array() giving you letters. I know that PHP is a functional language, and secondly, an OO language, but I think that you can blend these things better and have the OO brought to the forefront a bit more. Yes, I'm a fan of OO, but I know that many people aren't and don't use PHP's OO (and don't when it's appropriate). But I know you can integrate OO without having to force the functional programmers to give up their way. This is just ONE thing that could make PHP better and allow for more modern philosophical development. Particularly, I would like to see more creativity. Sure, PHP's moving fast, but with our big things being Unicode support and removing globals and safe mode, I think that we could be a little more innovative for PHP6. Again, it's not behind the times right now, but the times are changing and I'd like to see PHP change with them. M.T. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: no offense to Rasmus... are you kidding me
You guys make me laugh... :)
(And I really actually mean that in a nice way... that last bit was
quite funny. And yes, size does matter... some don't like it _too_
big.)
But, I digress.
I'm OK with taking this off-list... though I'd rather publicly reply.
Yeah, I meant procedural, not functional. Chalk one up to another
stupid mistake.
Also, realize, I'm not saying that we change PHP tomorrow... hell, we
don't even necessarily have to change PHP... I'm saying we think about
our philosophies and take these agile philosophies into view when we
consider making changes to PHP and designing our own applications.
Yes, I'm aware performance is a huge deal: I'm OK with developers
spending 90% of their time on performance tweaking and 10% on new
thinking... I don't want changes to hurt the people... that's
definitely not human-centric!
I like some stuff, and I know that what I like a lot of people don't
like (such as everything-as-objects). My ideas aren't to deface PHP...
Everything-as-objects in a transparent manner. Yeah, 5->length won't
be too useful, but ['one', 'two', 'three']->length would be, as well
as "strings with "->replace('/with/', 'as') objects... And of course,
other ways would work as well...
Hey, you know, that's just how I prefer... I like seeing numbers as
numbers with their own properties, same as strings and arrays, et al.
Hey, I know I'm weird, but I think I'm right.
But let me recenter that thought again... I'm not saying that we have
to change the language now, if ever: it's about our philosophies.
I mean, where did our changes come from anyways? Some crazy guy came
in and made suggestions that opened up new ways of thinking or at
least new ideas, maybe inspiring the current iteration we use today.
I'm hoping to act as a catalyst, even if just a little bit of movement
is made.
As far as the funeral goes, I'm not saying that PHP is on the crash
course either. I used that metaphor because I think that the way we
think about our language will become too strict or cemented to be
willing to make changes necessary to keep PHP alive: it will become as
hard to move within the community as the Titanic.
As far as AJAX is concerned: yeah, it's a bitch. I've gotten it to
work pretty cleanly in a newer project of mine with little
discrepencies, and, hopefully, if what I've been doing is good enough,
I might write about it (but we all know how well that goes over,
haha).
With all of the comments and all, I've lost track if there were any
others I wanted to make. Ah well, I'm sure you're more the happier for
me to stop (as am I, at this point).
I do want to say "Thank you" for your responses: I did want responses
and, eventually, I got some meaty responses! All the while, we were
thinking about things, which is good. That's the best way to start.
Oh, before I go... I want to echo the fact that AJAX and Web 2.0 are
not the same... AJAX is a tool, Web 2.0 (or Agile development) is a
philosophy.
M.T.
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
