php.net

**Selatos** · Jan 19, 2003, 11:06

the last discussion I remember reading was the php vs. macroshaft .NET. The PHP guy, who was right, said something about the best thing MS could possibly do would be PHP.NET. well, with apache you can call your files stuff like 'index.php.net' if you want to. You just need to edit the line that defines php extensions to include '.php.net'

Looks like PHP already had plans for PHP.NET

**archigamer** · Jan 19, 2003, 11:14

oh please.

I dont think php will be part of the .net languages for a long time to come. the most obvious reason is php needs to become strongly typed. until then php.net will cease to exist.

**Mincer** · Jan 19, 2003, 14:00

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

**Phil.Roberts** · Jan 19, 2003, 14:23

Yeah and you can set apache to parse files named *.php.cabbagepatchkids if you want. Or even *.whatasillytopicthisis should you wish it to. What EXACTLY is your point?

**M. Johansson** · Jan 19, 2003, 14:43

I rarely use this one, but:

**Clete2** · Jan 19, 2003, 17:29

if PHP goes microsux .net... i'm off to perl...

**sparkele** · Jan 19, 2003, 17:55

microsoft & opensource: i dont see the connection.

**archigamer** · Jan 19, 2003, 18:01

Originally posted by Clete2

if PHP goes microsux .net... i'm off to perl...

actually I heard somewhere (dunno know if its true or not) that there is a group of people trying to get perl and php to be a lanuage you can build .net applications with. If they do neither can be loosly typed, basically changing the language in my opinion.

**firepages** · Jan 19, 2003, 18:18

lol not sure why you are all laughing ...

After all , all MS have done to date is add '.NET' to everything (then remove it and call it April ... or was it April 2003 , I forget.)

Everything is .NET now, I see adverts in the papers requiring solid .NET experience

those recruiters just dont get paid enough do they

take a loaf of bread , call it <bread>bread</bread> and you got your self a .NET enabled proto-sandwidch mmmm, im off for breakfast.

**Jeremy W.** · Jan 19, 2003, 18:51

No, actually, .NET is an entirely different thing in a hundred ways. An application and a .NET application are 2 totally different things. A VB form and a VB.NET form are 2 completely different beasts. ASP and ASP.NET have nothing in common except "ASP" in the name.

There are a group of folks (actually 2 groups) working on PHP.NET. Really it's just another langauge with which you can write .NET. It wouldn't change anything for the PHP guys who want to write on Apache, but would mean that you could write Windows apps in PHP.NET and compile them into .NET IL (like Java's IL) just as if it was C#.

The PHP guys will, of course, say "so what we can already write Windows apps". Yeah, I'm not saying you can't, but if PHP.NET became a reality, all of a sudden y'all could apply for every .NET developer position out there becuase you would all of a sudden know a language currently used by 255,000 companies and growing daily.

I realise that for many people PHP and the whole open source movement is a rebellion, against MS, "movement" thing. For those people, PHP.NET won't change anything you do. For others though it could be a useful tool. Personally I believe making any language into a .NET language is a good thing, just if someone allowed PHP to write Java apps it would be a good thing.

The more your skills can do, the more you can do and the mroe marketable you are and the more you are worth.

**Rabbit** · Jan 20, 2003, 15:50

Very well put, Jeremy.

**redemption** · Jan 20, 2003, 19:54

Originally posted by archigamer
oh please.

I dont think php will be part of the .net languages for a long time to come. the most obvious reason is php needs to become strongly typed. until then php.net will cease to exist.

Heard of Perl.NET? I believe Perl isn't a strongly-typed language.

Why does a .NET language need to be strongly-typed? (I'm curious to know and as I was learning ASP.NET, the thought never occurred to me)

**Jeremy W.** · Jan 20, 2003, 21:45

All of them do because they boil down to the same IL at the end of the day, so there's a thousand things they need to fulfill for that to happen

**Mike Borozdin** · Jan 21, 2003, 05:57

Please, tell me for what is PHP.NET? There're many programming languages (C#, JS, VB, J#) which ASP.NET supports!!!
Or you want to make desktop apllication with PHP?! Ha! You're so lazy and you can't learn C or Pascal?!

**M. Johansson** · Jan 21, 2003, 06:08

Originally posted by Mika
Please, tell me for what is PHP.NET? There're many programming languages (C#, JS, VB, J#) which ASP.NET support!!!
Or you want to make desctop apllication with PHP?! Ha! You're so lazy and you can't learn C or Pascal?!

Easy, boy, easy...

The reason you can develop for .NET in different languages is because some people a compfortable with one syntax, and some people are comfortable with another. But from a technical standpoint, I see little point in any PHP.NET, as C# is pretty much superior in every way, and actually have a (what most people would call) a better syntax. What would PHP.NET really bring to the table besides case-insenitivity and an annoying syntax for class methods (object->method())?

**firepages** · Jan 21, 2003, 07:14

Mika, PHP already lets you create desktop applications, can already create Flash objects , images , PDF's , has native connection to all major and many minor data soures, direct I/O functionality , process control and buffering , COM support, IMAP POP3 and NNTP functionality , low level socket manuipulation , XML and XSLT parsing , FTP/HTTP, gzip & bzip compression, PERL compatible regular expressions, is already X-platform, memory management on *NIX etc. theres a longer list but it gets boring.

PHP would I think be seen as a boon for some of those reasons.

I doubt anyone could resonably object to PHP.NET (I actually agree with Jeremy's post for a change

) though I personally dont really see the point of or need for PHP.NET.

I assume that if .NET fufills even 1/4 of the hype, then .NET functionality will be built into PHP, its beginnings already exist to a point.

I agree with those who say , if you wanna write JAVA then write it in JAVA not PHP, let PHP talk to JAVA if required but thats that, seems daft to go the long way around, there is no such comparison in .NET as .NET is a different beast but again lets assume that VB and C# are the major .NET languages then stick to them.... why wouldnt ya ?

**Jeremy W.** · Jan 21, 2003, 07:39

I agree with all but the last bit

The reason .NET currently supports more than 30 languages is it's about choice. Program in what you want. In fact in my team there are 3 C# guys, 1 VB.NET guy and one Delphi.NET guy. We all work ON THE SAME projects and even modules without any problems at all.

So, I could hire a PHP.NET guy and know that as long as he knew the principles of development he'd fit right in (as long as he didn't say we should switch everything to Open Source everyday

).

**Perspicuous** · Jan 21, 2003, 07:46

I do .NET all day at my day job (VB.NET since 9/2001, and now C# since 11/2002) and I do PHP at night for fun.

The point of Java was to write it once (in Java) and run it anywhere. The dream didn't quite get to the reality, because if you want to use a platform to it's fullest you had to drop to native code - and that's the end of the run it anywhere option.

.NET (the philosophy, as opposed to the technology or the marketing ploy) proposes you write it however you feel comfortable and it will run anywhere you can find a CLR (similar to a Java VM) - which today is in Windows and I think BSD thanks to Rotor.

If these two approaches can meet in the middle, what we get is write what you want, however you want, and have it run wherever you want it to. Now don't that sound like Nerdvana??

"Long live the freedom of choice, even if you choose to act like a fool."
--Some Fool

<Thanks for wading through the preamble...>
Development of PHP.NET is simply an extension of M$'s write it in whatever language you feel comfortable philosophy. Basically it says that somebody out there thinks that there are some people that actually use PHP. I call that validation, not something to snivel about.
You're free to use it or ignore it. And I supose if you never intend to use it, you're free to complain that someone's putting it together for other people who might actually use it.

My $.02,
Michael

P.S. PHP and C# syntax are so similar, that it wouldn't be hard to use C# if you had to... I'm learning PHP based on my C# knowledge. So, Jeremy, slap C# on your resume! The bill rates are outrageous!

**Jeremy W.** · Jan 21, 2003, 07:48

I will, thank you very much, since I program in C# and VB.NET all day long

I'm the resident .NET guy who invades these forums, though you're welcome to join me in my quest for truth, love and a higher paying job

**DoobyWho** · Jan 21, 2003, 08:03

I totally agree with jeremy

**M. Johansson** · Jan 21, 2003, 08:32

Originally posted by firepages
Mika, PHP already lets you create desktop applications, can already create Flash objects , images , PDF's , has native connection to all major and many minor data soures, direct I/O functionality , process control and buffering , COM support, IMAP POP3 and NNTP functionality , low level socket manuipulation , XML and XSLT parsing , FTP/HTTP, gzip & bzip compression, PERL compatible regular expressions, is already X-platform, memory management on *NIX etc. theres a longer list but it gets boring.

PHP would I think be seen as a boon for some of those reasons.

Whoa yeah, and those are one of the finest things of PHP, but those are the PHP libraries, not the language itself, which is what would be PHP.NET. Of course, you could add a PHP namespace with the functionality, but that would be very messy.

I agree with you - I would't object to PHP.NET, but I fail to see the point - PHP's power lies in it's availibility (SUPER big amount of hosts), low learning curve, price, a fine and developed community and good RAD development. It's power does NOT lie in pure language functionality, at which it is pretty bad compared to, say, C#.

**voostind** · Jan 21, 2003, 09:01

I agree with all but the last bit The reason .NET currently supports more than 30 languages is it's about choice. Program in what you want. In fact in my team there are 3 C# guys, 1 VB.NET guy and one Delphi.NET guy. We all work ON THE SAME projects and even modules without any problems at all.

This point has many advantages, but at least just as many disadvantages.

For example: what if your Delphi.NET guy gets run over by a truck? Somebody has to take over his code. Or: when VB became VB.NET it wasn't VB anymore, so people had to be re-educated anyway. Or: VB might now be called VB.NET, but that doesn't mean it doesn't suck anymore. And so on, and so on.

But these are just disadvantages. ;-) As I said there are just as many advantages to using different languages in the same project. But you won't get them from me...

Vincent

**Jeremy W.** · Jan 21, 2003, 09:35

Hey mate, I'm pretty sure you've lost me.

If I have a guy working on a project, and he gets run over by a truck, "inconvenient" isn't going to be the word to describe it. He likely hasn't finished documenting and stuff, so finding another Delphi.NET guy really isn't the biggest issue.

At least in .NET we can consume what he's already done, no problem, and move on: with or without Delphi.NET.

VB.NET is nothing like VB. Any VB guy will tell you that thanks to the pains they go through. "Suck" is a bit of a relative word, especially when all the concerns I knew about VB were answered.

Re-education of staff is part of most corporate paths, and the job of most developers, anyways. It's only slightly harder than a major version upgrade in an IDE, which we both know is often painful for developers.

So... Disadvantages? The reality is that it's about choice. Any Team Leader could just as easily choose C# as the sole language, or any of the other 30 available. I decided that given the team's background it would best be served letting them choose and evolve as they saw fit. Of the 3 C# guys, not a one of them was a C-guy before. 2 were VB guys and one was a Delphi guy. Evolution happens, and I know that eventually the whole team will be using the same language.

I'd prefer to have my team as a team so that we can make long term decisions, than tell them what to do and have them leave sooner. In .NET the code is just as integrous so it's switching languages isn't quite the big deal it would be in another working environment

**firepages** · Jan 21, 2003, 09:54

Originally posted by M. Johansson

Whoa yeah, and those are one of the finest things of PHP, but those are the PHP libraries, not the language itself, which is what would be PHP.NET. Of course, you could add a PHP namespace with the functionality, but that would be very messy.

I agree with you - I would't object to PHP.NET, but I fail to see the point - PHP's power lies in it's availibility (SUPER big amount of hosts), low learning curve, price, a fine and developed community and good RAD development. It's power does NOT lie in pure language functionality, at which it is pretty bad compared to, say, C#.

several of the above are built in to PHP and the others could be linked if required I assume.

I have only just started playing with C# but please enlighten , what raw power are we talking about , I also try my best in C++ which is definately more powerful than PHP in many respects but not necc'ly the best bet for web-applications, hence .php and not .dll/so

please show why (as a web-application probramming language) it is so bad compared to C# preferably without note of 'everything is an object' the merits of which are subjective, nor PHP's current OOP which whilst more than usable will probably be updated around the same time as .NET gets its own server give or take a few months.

**voostind** · Jan 21, 2003, 09:58

If I have a guy working on a project, and he gets run over by a truck, "inconvenient" isn't going to be the word to describe it.

The social aspect was of course not what I was referring to. I was only trying to sketch a 'what if' situation...

As I was saying, there is an advantage and a disadvantage to being able to mix multiple languages. Programmers are able to work in the language they like most, so they can be most productive. On the other hand, if the result is a program written in twentysome different languages, then no single person is able to understand how the program works anymore. And that is definitely not good.

VB.NET is nothing like VB. Any VB guy will tell you that thanks to the pains they go through. "Suck" is a bit of a relative word, especially when all the concerns I knew about VB were answered.

I know that 'most problems' (to put it mildly) with the VB language were addressed in VB.NET. As a result VB.NET isn't VB anymore, it's a completely new language. So why still call it Visual Basic? I think that's not very smart (marketing-wise) because the name itself tends to make people feel a bit nauseated.

So... Disadvantages? The reality is that it's about choice.

There is another aspect: because all .NET code is compiled to an intermediate language, the various languages are semantically equal (C++ isn't supported for example, they call it 'Managed C++'). Then what exactly is the point of having 30 or more different languages that are all syntactically very different, but semantically completely the same?

Evolution happens, and I know that eventually the whole team will be using the same language.

...and thanks for making my point

Vincent

The SitePoint Forums have moved.

User Tag List

Thread: php.net

Thread Tools

Display

php.net

Re: php.net

Wow

For what is PHP.NET?????

Re: For what is PHP.NET?????

Coming from the other direction...

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions