SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 99
  1. #51
    Web-coding NINJA! silver trophy beetle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,900
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Hafsoh View Post
    I go with you but symfony is good for a complex website not really for a small size sites.
    I don't really agree with this.

    What do we mean by a "small size" site anyway? Number of pages? Amount of content? Number of features?

    To me, the number of features are most important to a site's technology (ignoring things like budget), not something like the number of pages.

    Yes, I agree that choosing a framework with a more-complicated-than-the-alternatives setup/configuration is offputting, but I'm willing to bet that it's actually cost-prohibitive in only the rarest of cases. And really, unless you're setting up your first or maybe 2nd Symfony site ever, it's not actually that hard.
    beetle a.k.a. Peter Bailey
    blogs: php | prophp | security | design | zen | software
    refs: dhtml | gecko | prototype | phpdocs | unicode | charsets
    tools: ide | ftp | regex | ffdev




  2. #52
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    32
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Pylons. Its not php its python.. its better.

  3. #53
    SitePoint Addict chestertondevelopment's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Essex, UK
    Posts
    241
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by nwmcsween
    Pylons. Its not php its python.. its better.
    Do you have any reason for this or are you merely trolling?

  4. #54
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    32
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stardustwd View Post
    Do you have any reason for this or are you merely trolling?
    about a thousand. python is very nice and fast.. sane naming and pylons is extremely easy almost exactly like RoR but it scales.

  5. #55
    SitePoint Guru dbevfat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    ljubljana, slovenia
    Posts
    684
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by nwmcsween View Post
    about a thousand. python is very nice and fast.. sane naming and pylons is extremely easy almost exactly like RoR but it scales.
    There are many different options with lots of pros and cons, but "use python" seems a pretty useless answer to a specific question like "what is the best PHP framework?", don't you think?

  6. #56
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Mackay, QLD, Australia
    Posts
    158
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I personally use CakePHP, and I love it. Documentation isn't that much of an issue for me, mainly because I test the framework to its limits, and when an error pops up, I find a way around it. Other than that, I spend most of my time in the API docs and the CakePHP google group. I have been in the IRC channel before, asked my question, got answered extremely quickly, but never been back, because of the google group and the API docs, everything is there.

    I have been through some of the frameworks' code too, which has helped me find out about various functions and methods that I can use, which aren't documented in the manual at all, but they're in the API, mostly, I just read the functions' code, and I'm happy.

    The community is massive, lots of support, and the framework is great. Plus, what makes it even better, is you can plug in the zend framework and use it like any other 3rd party plugin, best of both worlds just there.

    I agree, the zend framework is more like a library, not a real framework.

  7. #57
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    91
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by nwmcsween View Post
    about a thousand. python is very nice and fast.. sane naming and pylons is extremely easy almost exactly like RoR but it scales.
    Python may be nice and fast and pylons might be easy and scalable, but in the real world, where finding good quality experienced PHP developers to join and work on enterprise teams and enterprise projects is hard enough, I can't imagine how difficult it would be to dip into the tiny pool of skilled python developers (as it relates to that third tier of frameworks/project structures being discussed in this thread).

  8. #58
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy kyberfabrikken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Posts
    6,157
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ghuytro View Post
    Python may be nice and fast and pylons might be easy and scalable, but in the real world, where finding good quality experienced PHP developers to join and work on enterprise teams and enterprise projects is hard enough, I can't imagine how difficult it would be to dip into the tiny pool of skilled python developers (as it relates to that third tier of frameworks/project structures being discussed in this thread).
    Well, if you got yourself a skilled programmer, taking a month or two to school him in a new language, is an acceptable cost. I don't think the concrete language matters much.

  9. #59
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    91
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by kyberfabrikken View Post
    Well, if you got yourself a skilled programmer, taking a month or two to school him in a new language, is an acceptable cost. I don't think the concrete language matters much.
    One (1) skilled programmer yes. A team that grows and has inevitable turnover, promotions etc it's not feasible to incur training and development costs for every single new hire.

    I need to rely on the pre-existing knowledge, expertise and experience that people bring to my team. Why should I incur the cost of training 5 new people just so I can use a language where there is a lack of human resources? This makes no business sense to me when I've got new projects and fixes/enhancements to existing applications that I'm hiring people for in the first place.

    What exactly would I be gaining for incurring that expense? That is, what is so superior about python to php that it's worth tens of thousands of dollars in cost to enable my organization to be able to utilize it for my enterprise projects?

  10. #60
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    css ajax pear smarty php asp scripts web templates
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I prefer CodeIgniter - small and simple.
    css ajax pear smarty php asp scripts web templates jaspal links
    downloads forum blog software development ecommerce hosting
    http://www.aadhunik.com/

  11. #61
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    232
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Lamiunto View Post
    I agree, the zend framework is more like a library, not a real framework.
    No wait, that's wrong. A lot of people keep saying that, I don't now why. It's explained very well in the manual: Zend Framework has a component called Controller that uses the front controller pattern and mvc pattern. Controller is the heart of the framework. It's also based on the request and response pattern, has a router a dispatcher and much more. Zend framework is not a library, and it's not "like" a library. Is an MVC framework that provides an extensive collection of components.

  12. #62
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Mackay, QLD, Australia
    Posts
    158
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by phpimpact View Post
    No wait, that's wrong. A lot of people keep saying that, I don't now why. It's explained very well in the manual: Zend Framework has a component called Controller that uses the front controller pattern and mvc pattern. Controller is the heart of the framework. It's also based on the request and response pattern, has a router a dispatcher and much more. Zend framework is not a library, and it's not "like" a library. Is an MVC framework that provides an extensive collection of components.
    My reasoning for calling it a library is that it doesn't force you to use any form of design method. Take for instance cake, you must use MVC, you have no choice, you must follow certain naming conventions, and you must follow a set directory structure. The base implementation of your site in cake is already there, you don't need to code your own bootstrapper or page controller, it's there already.

    With a framework like cake, your site is already there. With a library like ZF, you need to choose your components, then extend those. You can extend and include components to a point where it does become a framework, but out of the box, ZF is not a framework.

  13. #63
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    32
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ghuytro View Post
    One (1) skilled programmer yes. A team that grows and has inevitable turnover, promotions etc it's not feasible to incur training and development costs for every single new hire.

    I need to rely on the pre-existing knowledge, expertise and experience that people bring to my team. Why should I incur the cost of training 5 new people just so I can use a language where there is a lack of human resources? This makes no business sense to me when I've got new projects and fixes/enhancements to existing applications that I'm hiring people for in the first place.

    What exactly would I be gaining for incurring that expense? That is, what is so superior about python to php that it's worth tens of thousands of dollars in cost to enable my organization to be able to utilize it for my enterprise projects?
    Speed = less hardware costs, maintainability = less developer time, Expandability = create web applications one day create desktop applications the next.

  14. #64
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy kyberfabrikken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Posts
    6,157
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ghuytro View Post
    One (1) skilled programmer yes. A team that grows and has inevitable turnover, promotions etc it's not feasible to incur training and development costs for every single new hire.
    Fair point, though it depends a lot on the turnaround time of the programmers. The longer they stay, the less important the initial cost is. Also, in most jobs, there would be a period of learning -- even if the programmer knows the language in advance. This period could be combined with learning the language.

    Quote Originally Posted by ghuytro View Post
    What exactly would I be gaining for incurring that expense? That is, what is so superior about python to php that it's worth tens of thousands of dollars in cost to enable my organization to be able to utilize it for my enterprise projects?
    One thing to consider is, that since there are few enterprises, which use python, there a fewer jobs. This means, that even with fewer programmers around, the amount of skilled programmers for hire, may be about the same as with a more popular language.

  15. #65
    SitePoint Guru dbevfat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    ljubljana, slovenia
    Posts
    684
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by kyberfabrikken View Post
    One thing to consider is, that since there are few enterprises, which use python, there a fewer jobs. This means, that even with fewer programmers around, the amount of skilled programmers for hire, may be about the same as with a more popular language.
    I really fail to see the logic in that. Basically what you're saying is that the percentage of skilled programmers for a given language should increase as the number of available jobs for that language decreases.

    If you have 100 times more php than python programmers (probably not far from the truth), and 1% of php-ers are "skilled" (however you define it), than all python programmers should be comparably skilled. I think this is quite unlikely.

  16. #66
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    32
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by kyberfabrikken View Post
    Fair point, though it depends a lot on the turnaround time of the programmers. The longer they stay, the less important the initial cost is. Also, in most jobs, there would be a period of learning -- even if the programmer knows the language in advance. This period could be combined with learning the language.


    One thing to consider is, that since there are few enterprises, which use python, there a fewer jobs. This means, that even with fewer programmers around, the amount of skilled programmers for hire, may be about the same as with a more popular language.
    Not true Google uses it, Boeing, the government, alot of games use it, NASA. What separates the programmers from the hobbyist is knowledge beyond what the language offers such as computer science.

  17. #67
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    5
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Solar

    +1 for Solar - http://solarphp.com

    not bloat. pure elegance.

  18. #68
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Zend is pretty nice for me. There are many components and also components which could be used somewhere else.

  19. #69
    SitePoint Zealot dereko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    189
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    We built our own framework about 3 years ago because at the time I felt there were not good frameworks already out there. (CodeIgniter and Zend didn't exist and I wasn't impressed with Cake at the time)

    I don't advocate building you own because its a big big job to get right. I also won't claim that we got it all right either. I will say though that I think I've learned a lot from the experience and now I'm ready to use one of the frameworks out there.

    Practical things I look for:
    1. good naming conventions. if you use camel then I'm sorry but you don't understand the basic principle of creating a naming convention in the first place; which is to minimise the character set so its more obvious what the name of function/variable/class should be. By using uppercase characters you double you char set. It baffles me why anyone would use camel or anything like it. "I prefer the look of it" is not a valid answer, its not about you its about everyone who has to code in the project now or later.

    2. never advocate allowing the user to put html in controller code.
    In my opinion the view is about html and creating semantic markup. CSS controls style and layout. the controller's job is to give the view all the variables it requires to present what it wants to present. In the view it should only be allowed to print, condition and loop through variables.

    3. Simple Template Language. I think the likes of savant is perfect because why create another template language when PHP already has the constructs that you need.

    4. Matching names across all layers. For example if i have a entity in my system called car. The database table should be called 'car', the business logic class if there is one is call 'car', the controller and the view is called 'car' or car_add in the case of views. (entity_action) this applies to file names, class names.

    Other nice to have:
    ajax helpers, authentication, scafolding, form validation, messaging system for notices/warnings/success messages etc to the user.


    so, what are my options now?

    I'm in the research stage. So far;

    Zend: looks interesting although i think I'd have to create a guideline doc on top of it to ensure the developer doesnt stray to much with all the options

    Codeigniter: really like the doc and simplicity. Worried about not allowing multiple views though.


    Still have bit to go. haven't properly looked at Cake yet.
    Last edited by dereko; Jan 29, 2008 at 11:32. Reason: few typos, added other nice to haves

  20. #70
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dereko View Post
    I don't advocate building you own because its a big big job to get right.
    You might have a point somewhere, but I don't agree.

    1. Would you rather hire someone who:
    - Wrote their own framework and understands the core principles and why technique X is used, and not Y (which is found after iterative versions)
    - Knows public framework X like the back of their hand, but hasn't really looked into alternatives (or hasn't used them at all)
    2. A framework is not really that huge of an undertaking. Because framework is such a liberal term, it's hard to estimate the size. But a basic site framework (MVC, etc.) does not take that long. The individual components are developed over time. This is how a lot of DIY programmers come up with their own framework. Keep building new components and updating their quality.

    You learn a lot more from building things yourself, rather than getting experienced with something specific. As kyberfabrikken points out, a programmer who understands programming in its essence is a lot more valuable than someone who understands a specific language.

    Quote Originally Posted by dereko View Post
    Practical things I look for:
    1. good naming conventions. if you use camel then I'm sorry but you don't understand the basic principle of creating a naming convention in the first place; which is to minimise the character set so its more obvious what the name of function/variable/class should be. By using uppercase characters you double you char set. It baffles me why anyone would use camel or anything like it. "I prefer the look of it" is not a valid answer, its not about you its about everyone who has to code in the project now or later.
    I'm not sure I understand your problem with camel case. What do you mean by 'minimizing character set'? I don't see the usefulness of reducing readability to save a few bytes, if that is what you mean.

    Quote Originally Posted by dereko View Post
    2. never advocate allowing the user to put html in controller code.
    In my opinion the view is about html and creating semantic markup. CSS controls style and layout. the controller's job is to give the view all the variables it requires to present what it wants to present. In the view it should only be allowed to print, condition and loop through variables.
    That's the basic principle of MVC, I don't think I've seen it done.

    Quote Originally Posted by dereko View Post
    4. Matching names across all layers. For example if i have a entity in my system called car. The database table should be called 'car', the business logic class if there is one is call 'car', the controller and the view is called 'car' or car_add in the case of views. (entity_action) this applies to file names, class names.
    A lot of these things are preference. I prefer to name my tables in plural form, because it makes sense when writing the query.

    Code:
    SELECT * FROM cars
    And I think the controller should be called CarController.

    But those are just my opinions. They might not be yours.

  21. #71
    SitePoint Zealot dereko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    189
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by aedrin View Post
    You might have a point somewhere, but I don't agree.

    1. Would you rather hire someone who:
    - Wrote their own framework and understands the core principles and why technique X is used, and not Y (which is found after iterative versions)
    - Knows public framework X like the back of their hand, but hasn't really looked into alternatives (or hasn't used them at all)
    2. A framework is not really that huge of an undertaking. Because framework is such a liberal term, it's hard to estimate the size. But a basic site framework (MVC, etc.) does not take that long. The individual components are developed over time. This is how a lot of DIY programmers come up with their own framework. Keep building new components and updating their quality.

    You learn a lot more from building things yourself, rather than getting experienced with something specific. As kyberfabrikken points out, a programmer who understands programming in its essence is a lot more valuable than someone who understands a specific language.

    my point is at some point some group will create something that is better than what you can create and therefore will help you create a better application/website.

    building it yourself is very much a learning experince which i pointed out. like everything though most projects have cost issues associated with them. so developing your own framework isn't as cost effective as using a well written framework as your starting point.


    I'm not sure I understand your problem with camel case. What do you mean by 'minimizing character set'? I don't see the usefulness of reducing readability to save a few bytes, if that is what you mean.
    optimise_output is just as readable as OptimiseOutput or is that optimiseOutput? Its not about "i like the way that looks". If i have 10 developers and i explain that they can't use uppercase in their file names and spaces should be replaced with underscore then there is no confusion. I have 27 possible chars to choose from you have 52.

    That's the basic principle of MVC, I don't think I've seen it done.
    In the thrid video tutorial for codeigniter they make that mistake. I've seen it in other places as well.

    A lot of these things are preference. I prefer to name my tables in plural form, because it makes sense when writing the query.

    Code:
    SELECT * FROM cars
    i don't disagree with what you have here but if you are on my team and you do it that way then every coder needs to do it that way. car or cars, i think either could be the acceptable way but not both.

    my preference is singular in this case.

  22. #72
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dereko View Post
    my point is at some point some group will create something that is better than what you can create and therefore will help you create a better application/website.
    The problem that I have with other frameworks is that though they might have more features/stability, they do not conform to my style. Which is important to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by dereko View Post
    building it yourself is very much a learning experince which i pointed out. like everything though most projects have cost issues associated with them. so developing your own framework isn't as cost effective as using a well written framework as your starting point.
    I guess the discussion point is whether you are in a commercial or personal setting. For me it is a mix of both.

    Quote Originally Posted by dereko View Post
    optimise_output is just as readable as OptimiseOutput or is that optimiseOutput? Its not about "i like the way that looks". If i have 10 developers and i explain that they can't use uppercase in their file names and spaces should be replaced with underscore then there is no confusion. I have 27 possible chars to choose from you have 52.
    Though I agree that those 3 variations are all just as readable, and that a singular method of naming is important, I don't see a benefit from using less characters? As I said, it's not really a space issue these days. Typing wise it makes little difference too (I would actually say that typing an underscore slows down typing because it is out of reach).

    Quote Originally Posted by dereko View Post
    In the thrid video tutorial for codeigniter they make that mistake. I've seen it in other places as well.
    That must say something about their framework

    Quote Originally Posted by dereko View Post
    i don't disagree with what you have here but if you are on my team and you do it that way then every coder needs to do it that way. car or cars, i think either could be the acceptable way but not both.
    Correct, the main requirement should be that everyone does it the same. The problem often is finding the right requirement. (See: The age-old tabs vs. spaces debate)

  23. #73
    SitePoint Zealot dereko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    189
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Though I agree that those 3 variations are all just as readable, and that a singular method of naming is important, I don't see a benefit from using less characters? As I said, it's not really a space issue these days. Typing wise it makes little difference too (I would actually say that typing an underscore slows down typing because it is out of reach).
    It has nothing to do with performance or coding speed. Its a social issue in the coding enviroment. If a colleague asks me what the name of a function is and i say "optimize output" he can take it as given that it is "optimize_output" if i were using camel case people confuse what the name could be. e.g. "optimizeOutput" or "OptimizeOutput". you can have rules that explain where you capitalize. My point is why? use lowercase with underscore and you have 27 possible chars to chose from when writing a function/variable/class name.

    If i give you a puzzel with 27 pieces and one with 52 which is easier to solve?

    There is no downside here so why use camelcase? To say it is a preference, in my mind is not a valid reason.

  24. #74
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Camel case is defined to be capitalize every word, except the first (when you also do the first, it has a different name, I believe something like Delphi or Pascal). So as long as you can figure out the words you are fine. You have to know the words for all lowercase with underscore as well.

    I'm not sure I understand the puzzle piece analogy, as it's the same characters. The computer deals with them differently, but the human mind does not (A and a are the same.)

    Again, an issue of preference and it works any way as long as everyone agrees one 1 method.

    I probably should say that I usually work alone, and as such what my preference is becomes the standard.

  25. #75
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The argument over camel case vs not is kind of funny... ultimately it doesn't matter. I personally use camel case for functions/methods and lowercase with underscores for variables/properties.

    Josh


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •