Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Go with PHP

gowithphp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 532 posts

Re: Go with PHP

#171

Post by ayewo »

sph wrote: post #122
Elte wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The documentation reads like a tutorial, which is fine the first time you read it, and really annoying the next 99 times when you're just trying to find something. My biggest gripe though is that the majority of classes / methods aren't locally documented with comments, or only minimally. If I don't understand how a certain parameter behaves (or even what a function does), I have to go online and search for examples,…

> The documentation reads like a tutorial, which is fine the first time you read it, and really annoying the next 99 times when you're just trying to find something. Ah yes, the Ansible approach. I've used it for a decade, and I routinely get lost in its utterly terrible by-example documentation. They are the golden standard on how not to write documentation. God, I hate the Ansible docs so much, they are the reason…

I think more documentation teams need to know of the concept of Diataxis [1] so they can invest in the 4 different kinds of documentation developers turn to for help when picking up a new technology:

- tutorials;

- how-to guides;

- technical reference and;

- explanation.

1: https://diataxis.fr

Re: Go with PHP

#172

Post by kristofferg »

sph wrote: post #122
Elte wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The documentation reads like a tutorial, which is fine the first time you read it, and really annoying the next 99 times when you're just trying to find something. My biggest gripe though is that the majority of classes / methods aren't locally documented with comments, or only minimally. If I don't understand how a certain parameter behaves (or even what a function does), I have to go online and search for examples,…

> The documentation reads like a tutorial, which is fine the first time you read it, and really annoying the next 99 times when you're just trying to find something. Ah yes, the Ansible approach. I've used it for a decade, and I routinely get lost in its utterly terrible by-example documentation. They are the golden standard on how not to write documentation. God, I hate the Ansible docs so much, they are the reason…

For stuff like Ansible (and other lacking software) docs i find that ChatGPT can provide the missing pieces.

Re: Go with PHP

#173

Post by mschuster91 »

sph wrote: post #122
Elte wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The documentation reads like a tutorial, which is fine the first time you read it, and really annoying the next 99 times when you're just trying to find something. My biggest gripe though is that the majority of classes / methods aren't locally documented with comments, or only minimally. If I don't understand how a certain parameter behaves (or even what a function does), I have to go online and search for examples,…

> The documentation reads like a tutorial, which is fine the first time you read it, and really annoying the next 99 times when you're just trying to find something. Ah yes, the Ansible approach. I've used it for a decade, and I routinely get lost in its utterly terrible by-example documentation. They are the golden standard on how not to write documentation. God, I hate the Ansible docs so much, they are the reason…

What is wrong with the Ansible documentation?! Almost all Ansible module documentation pages follow the same structure: a one-sentence synopsis, a list of OS packages needed to be present on the machine where Ansible runs and on the target machine, a table of parameters including aliases, default values and other hints, a list of attributes exported, some notes, and real-world examples.

It doesn't get more clear than that.

Re: Go with PHP

#174

Post by nologic01 »

konart wrote: post #66

Why would you go with PHP+whateverframework instead of Ruby on Rails or Django? I haven't touched PHP since 5th version and I'm kind of sceptical it can offer anything RoR can't.

I don't know why you are being downvoted, this is a very legitimate question. These server-side frameworks are all alive and kicking and very competitive. When some other smaller ecosystem comes up with a good idea (like elixir/phoenix) there is a rush to replicate which happens rather fast.

I think in the end the competition will lead to specialization. Python will almost certainly capitalize on its data science / ML links but its not clear (to me at least) how php and ruby will differentiate themselves.

Re: Go with PHP

#175

Post by demurgos »

mekoka wrote: post #49

Any programmers here who've used PHP to build command line tools in PHP? What is the experience like compared to, let's say Python or node.js? How good are the facilities? What are the limitations?

I tried to write a CLI tool for orchestration by wrapping some sub-processes. I found PHP very limited in its ability to handle subprocesses (streams, error handling, signal forwarding). I tried to avoid using frameworks, but eventually used Symfony's "Process" lib. It helped with Linux but Windows support is very limited.

This experience was pretty disappointing, but also pretty niche. Overall I agree with the general sentiment that PHP is very nice to use nowadays, especially for web development.

Re: Go with PHP

#176

Post by simonhamp »

BulgarianIdiot wrote: post #168

The problem is this page advertises Laravel, not PHP. Ruby on Rails has many similar "demo worthy" snippets that make complex tasks seem readable and intuitive to the layman. Laravel and Ruby on Rails have something else in common: due to the focus on these "natural" interfaces, they compromise in every other way. Architecture, performance, testability and so on and so on. For those who know PHP, this code is full of…

Making "complex tasks seem readable and intuitive to the layman" is no bad thing - besides other engineers, future you could become a 'layman' easily. Readable, expressive code is something I've come to value highly after almost 20 years

And from first-hand experience, while the specific code sample shown on this page shouldn't be treated as a practical example of how to architect a larger application, there's nothing compromised here in terms of performance or testability.

All tech is tech debt at some level or at some time - what has happened to pragmatism? Laravel has actually helped me write the most performant, tested and least-refactored code I've ever written.

Like any tool, used properly it will do its job well; simply grumbling and shooing it away does not stop it being a perfectly fine tool in the right hands.

Re: Go with PHP

#177

Post by cjbgkagh »

ofrzeta wrote: post #167
KyeRussell wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be blunt, you are a terrible hiring manager if your red flag is “they haven’t got an up-to-date opinion about the shitty-history language that I’m personally into”. This just sounds like PHP Stockholm syndrome with extra steps.

I guess it depends on how it's communicated. If someone tells me he doesn't like PHP because of this and that reason, that's fine. Getting wound up about some specific programming language (feature) or any tech still raises a red flag for me. But then I might be terrible as well :)

I can be pretty confident that if a language is not from the ML family I’m not going to like it for all of the reasons it’s not a ML language.

Re: Go with PHP

#179

Post by topicseed »

keyle wrote: post #17

As a fullstack developer who has worked many, many years in the javascript hellhole, I mean ecosystem, as well as the python ecosystem and .NET; coming back to PHP the last 2 years, working essentially in Laravel and the like - I couldn't approve more of this message. Seriously, PHP is the grand father that will drive you to class and you'll never be late, the car will never smell and everything will always just be f…

The NPM/JS/TS hellhole is real. Moved on from it a couple of years ago, and today I switch between Go and PHP (WP custom stuff).

Obviously Go and PHP are two very different languages but they bring me peace in ways JS never did. Especially when reopening older projects.

Re: Go with PHP

#180

Post by topicseed »

0xblinq wrote: post #93
safety1st wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This 100%. It's actually a bit of a red flag to me these days if a developer turns up their nose at PHP. The language has matured a lot and building stuff with it is simple, cheap, straightforward and fast. If someone's still hating on PHP in 2023 it makes me wonder if they've been focused on more exotic technology because they were looking to pad their resume with more expensive skills, build science projects for th…

Don't you dare to tell me that my isomorphic Node trpc graphql with redux and sagas on top of next.js with SSG and SSR and parts in server components with my home grown validation and ORM framework and still no translations because they don't work together with everything else and deployed on serverless docker lambdas to a kubernetes cluster is over engineering a landing page with a contact form. So fast! That's a st…

Yeh, JS-land is wild. In a way, it's amazing that this ecosystem is so lively and fertile, but my gosh it's draining.
Post reply on HN