What are Ruby developers saying about PHP

[phpimpact]

BTW, SitePoint is promoting RoR like I never seen before, giving away free books, posting messages and stuff... ummm..... what's going on in this forum?

We’re Having 60 Days of Rails Madness!

Shayne Tilley
Marketing Manager, SitePoint

[libranet]

BTW, SitePoint is promoting RoR like I never seen before, giving away free books, posting messages and stuff... ummm..... what's going on in this forum?

I guess the book is not selling well

[Dr Livingston]

Maybe... But they are not really losing out, as the free download will be all over the social networks now, so everyone who wasn't aware of either Sitepoint, or the book, will be now, so it's a gain in some respects.

Consider it free publicity is how I look at it, which isn't a bad thing, in the way Sitepoint have went about it. But would I have bought the book? No, as I don't do Ruby on Rails, more so than that Sitepoint's books don't have any influence or appeal

[phpimpact]

Yeah, it's not a bad strategy

[Czaries]

I think it's a great strategy for a book that may not be selling well... especially if they can ride the wave of Ruby/Rails success...

[mwmitchell]

Personally I don't care what the Rails fanatics say - until Ruby/Rails is as easy to use and deploy out in the real world as PHP is today, we won't have too much to worry about.

What's to worry about? Something that may be better? Why would that worry anyone? I'm happy about it.

Also, it's really not that hard to deploy a Rails application. It's just different. I can do it in 15 (10?) minutes with the right tools and access.

[fl0w]

I'll just say this PHP was designed for the web. Ruby was not.

That's just wrong. Ruby wasn't, neither was C. PHP was, and RoR was indeed.

[logic_earth]

Rails is a framework not a language, yes it was made for the web but Ruby was not. Since PHP is not a framework but a language, you cannot compare Rails to PHP. Two different things.

[mwmitchell]

Well, not really. What is the definition of framework? I think PHP is a framework, in that it provides many things out of the box, exposed to the devloper. In PHP, you can do $_GET['id']. You can't do that with *Ruby*. But you can with Rails.

Without loading any extra extentions, you can even connect to a database with PHP mysql_connect(...). You can't do that with *Ruby*, but you can with Rails.

PHP peeps say, "PHP was designed for the web, RUBY was not!"

PHP peeps say, "Oh, and don't compare PHP to RAILS, because PHP is not a framework so it's not fair!"

I say, whatever. What's the point? Why are PHP peeps so defensive when it comes to Rails? Just have some fun and create some applications.

--- Rails peeps say, "Oh this is so cool! Look what I can do now!"

[33degrees]

Well, not really. What is the definition of framework?

From "design patterns":

A framework is a set of cooperating classes that make up a reusable design for a specific class of software. A framework provides architectural guidance by partitioning the design into abstract classes and defining their responsibilities and collaborations. A developer customizes a framework to a particular application by subclassing and composing instances of framework classes.

... [a framework] dictates the architecture of your application. It will define the overall structure, its partitioning into classes and objects, the key responsibilities thereof, how the classes and objects collaborate, and the thread of control. A framework predefines these design parameters so that you, the application designer/implementer, can concentrate on the specifics of your application. The framework captures the design decisions that are common to its application domain. Frameworks thus emphasize design reuse over code reuse, though a framework will usually include concrete subclasses you can put to work immediately.

In other words, a framework provides inversion of control, giving you a high level structure and leaving you specific places to tailor the behavior. Unlike a library, which is just code you can call, a framework calls your code as well. This is what rails gives you, but not php.

I think PHP is a framework, in that it provides many things out of the box, exposed to the devloper.

PHP offers a lot of web related functionality, but you are left to handle the high level code, which is why it's not a framework.

[mwmitchell]

Well, I prefer this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework

IMHO, I don't think it has anything to do with OOP. OOP can make it better obviously.

PHP does give you an application environment (+mod_php) out of the box. Page controllers, http request access, sessions, easy db access (PDO?), templating...

PHP offers a lot of web related functionality, but you are left to handle the high level code, which is why it's not a framework.

High level code is totally relative. This is certainly not low level:

if( isset($_POST['Submit']) && ! isset($_SESSION['form_sent']) ){
    $_SESSION['form_set']=true;
    mail('me@me.com', 'Submit!', 'Hi');
    header('Location: thanks.php');
    exit;
} 

EDIT:

...but you are left to handle the high level code, which is why it's not a framework.

I have yet to see a "framework" that handles the "high level" code for me! I'm still writing the "high level" code in Rails by the way.

[Czaries]

I think the key element here is structure. PHP provides a ton of bundled libraries and functions out of the box, but no structure whatsoever. It leaves the entire handling of all the data to you, doesn't define any responsibilities of different pieces of your system, etc. This is what makes PHP NOT a framework, regardless of how much other stuff it comes with.

[BerislavLopac]

PHP is a framework, written in C (just as Rails is framework written in Ruby). You can write low-level code to extend the framework in C (just as you can do it in Rails, using Ruby), and you can write high-level code to utilize the framework in it's own syntax which is also called PHP (and in Rails, you do that using Ruby).

[33degrees]

Well, I prefer this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework

Did you read that page? It just links off to other pages, and the one on software frameworks says: "A software framework is a reusable design for a software system (or subsystem). This is expressed as a set of abstract classes and the way their instances collaborate for a specific type of software."

Doesn't sound like PHP to me.

PHP does give you an application environment (+mod_php) out of the box. Page controllers, http request access, sessions, easy db access (PDO?), templating...

Lots of other languages offer the same things, the difference being that they're bundled as part of their standard libraries instead of directly built into the language.

I have yet to see a "framework" that handles the "high level" code for me! I'm still writing the "high level" code in Rails by the way.

I meant high level in terms of hierarchy of control. Rails sits higher in the hierarchy, and delegates control to the classes you write.

PHP is a framework, written in C (just as Rails is framework written in Ruby). You can write low-level code to extend the framework in C (just as you can do it in Rails, using Ruby), and you can write high-level code to utilize the framework in it's own syntax which is also called PHP (and in Rails, you do that using Ruby).

By that logic, all programming languages are frameworks; you can easily replace the words PHP by Ruby, or Perl, and the paragraph is just as true. And even if I agreed with you (which I don't), it still wouldn't mean the you can directly compare PHP with Ruby on Rails.

[Czaries]

PHP is a framework, written in C (just as Rails is framework written in Ruby). You can write low-level code to extend the framework in C (just as you can do it in Rails, using Ruby), and you can write high-level code to utilize the framework in it's own syntax which is also called PHP (and in Rails, you do that using Ruby).

... riiiight. And C is just a framework for assembly code.

[Dr Livingston]

And you could say that assembly language is just a framework for those 0s and 1s? Like, just how abstract do you want to become...

PHP is nothing like Ruby on Rails, and vice versa, regardless of your political standpoint. PHP is a language, Ruby on Rails isn't. A distinct difference I imagine...

[worchyld]

I agree with those who say setting up Ruby on Rails is a real nightmare, I noticed this issue about a year or so ago when I tried it out - and I thought "Hang on, I thought this was supposed to make things easier, not harder" -- but having said that, there are some ideas that Rails does that I really like, and I like the agile nature of the framework, but unless it becomes easier to install, and manage I don't think I'll be touching it. Not just yet, anyhow.

[phpimpact]

just how abstract do you want to become...

The brain is the framework of the mind, that provides thought, perception, emotion, will, memory, and imagination?

[mwmitchell]

In response to Rails being a "nightmare" to install... that's your opinion and also very relative. How easy does something neeed to be before it's a "nightmare"? Can you install PHP, Apache, Mod PHP any easier than you can Ruby, Gems and Rails? If it is that hard for you, maybe you should keep trying because it's always good to solve difficult problems. You'll probably find that it actually had nothing to do with Rails, but probably your system.

[ruby-lang]

For people still wondering what frameworks are, they are like Hollywood agents. You don't call them, they call you. Rails and CakePHP are both frameworks: they call your controllers when they find a match in their routing files. PHP isn't a framework, although it is a Domain-Specific Language for web development.

[phpimpact]

Welcome back to the PHP forum ruby-lang, amazing how people are switching back to PHP.

[ruby-lang]

Heh. The main reason I chose this username is there's no chance people will find me with a Google search, so I'm free to discuss my world-domination plans here. Of course, I love Ruby, and that played a big factor in my choice too.

Now, professionally speaking, I never switched from or to PHP. The language that puts bread on my table is Java. From that standpoint, I think Rails was the best thing that could ever happen to the PHP community. Thanks to it, people now have solid frameworks like CakePHP and Symfony, and even when they don't use them, they think about separation of concerns and other concepts that weren't receiving their due attention in the past.

On the other hand, I agree that the growth of Ruby as a web development is being hampered by the lack of a lightweight, "FTP it and forget it" deployment alternative. When you are used to having dedicated servers and wrestling with big Java servers, that doesn't look like a huge concern. But when you see it from the other side, the $10/mo hosting account, like I have in the past months in my hobby projects, that's huge. I don't think Rails will ever go in that direction, but I'm confident that another framework will show up at some point to fill that gap. It's just too obvious.

[varunkrish]

I think I wont be trying Rails as I m happy with PHP