Would you agree this is the definition of a PHP framework?

Please link me to a post where you’ve made an actual apples to apples comparison. E.g. You have shown more than one way a problem can be solved and then identified the strengths/weaknesses of each approach.

Hark at the pot calling the kettle black! You are the one who redefines the circumstances under which Dependency Injection provides benefits, then tells me that I am wrong for not agreeing with your definition.

OK - enough. Let’s get back to discussing issues, rather than each other.


The framework is in control. Writing:

$app = new Application();

puts the framework in control. The default behavior is to run your application. All you’re in control of is starting the Application; you are not in control of how the application runs–the framework is.

1 Like

This isn’t quite correct. It isn’t a problem questioning. It’s just that you don’t just question, you also say your code is just as good (or at times one would think you think it is better). It isn’t better. We’ve proven that without a doubt.

And one of them has NEVER been a 9000 loc monster class. Yet you insist, it is ok. You don’t even realize, your argumenting over it being “ok” just takes the “competency” legs right from underneath you.

Nobody, who programs, goes through the effort to throw away the code after a single use. That is a silly supposition to make and rather lame attempt to make yourself out to be a better programmer, which you are not.

And you are married to your code badly. You can’t even look at other developer’s code without having to compare it to yours and to find fault with theirs, so you can push yours up as “the better framework”. You can’t learn from others, without looking at your code and basically cherry picking the written articles on coding theory to try and show how you’ve done things differently and in places incorrectly, yet try and show it is right. “The experts have said so.”


1 Like

That text was copied directly from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_framework

Just because you find articles which offer a different definition than the one found in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_framework does not means that those articles are correct. As far as I am concerned they are merely offering different opinions, and I do not agree with those opinions.

So you’re seriously suggesting we should take a line on a wikipedia page which has [citation needed] as more authoritative than a peer reviewed paper from CERN or Manchester University.

This topic is now closed. I will reopen it in ten minutes time, which I hope will have given everyone the chance to calm down and think of less personal responses.

1 Like

This topic is now opened. New replies are allowed - but please keep them civil.

I deliberately missed out the fourth line as it was not relevant to the particular question I was answering.

No they do not. All the Controllers, Views, Data Access Objects and the abstract class which is inherited by all Models are built into the framework and do not have to be modified by any developer at any time.

Unit testing would be far too expensive to implement at this stage in a large enterprise application.

As for separation od concerns and better modularity, I have already stated several times that my framework is based around a combination of the 3-Tier architecture and the MVC design pattern, so that it has all the separation and modularity it needs. By taking my existing cohesive modules and breaking them down into artificially small units I would end up with nothing more than a collection of fragments in which all cohesion would be lost.

That wasn’t the question though was it

Incorrect. I simply say that my results are just as good but that the code I use to achieve those results is different.

You may have proven it to yourself but not to me.

Every one of the 120 methods in that class needs t be there and nowhere else, so every one of the lines of code in each of those methods needs to be there. The fact that you cannot envisage a class ever needing 120 methods means that you have never written a large and complicated application.

If you read http://www.tonymarston.net/php-mysql/your-code-is-crap.html#table1 you will see that I use 42 of those methods in a simple UPDATE operation. If you look carefully you will see that each of those methods has a definite purpose, so to use fewer methods would do nothing but diminish the flexibility of the entire application.

Just like you are criticising my code by comparing it to yours.

Yes I can, but only when they can teach something that has genuine value instead of being nothing more than a “personal preference”.

Just like you cherry-pick articles which support YOUR point of view.

What metric are you using to measure “good”?

They produce the results that my customers expect and are willing to pay for.

In that case the code itself is irrelevant. Why are you here arguing about specifics (DI, Autoloading, Separation of concerns)?

I am defending my coding style for the simple reason that you, and many others like you, keep attacking it for no other reason than it does follow your preferred style. There is no “one size fits all” style, so stop trying to bend me to your will as it simply will not work.

1 Like

This is the epitome of it all. I am not the only person who cannot envisage a 120 method class. In fact, most programmers can’t. It is a clear break of SRP, which you deny to be breaking, which is clearly wrong.


For the hundredth or more time: You keep coming here and saying “DI IS EVIL” or “YERRR DOING IT WRONG LOOK AT MY MAGICAL AMAZING CODE, IT’S PERFECT!!!11!”. When we demonstrate this to be an incorrect assertion you have a hissy fit and do everything you can to argue that the code is perfect (It’s demonstrably not, as we’ve shown time and time again.)