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

PHP Addiction

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 320 posts

Re: PHP Addiction

#251

Post by aggronn »

rickmb wrote: post #228
Legion wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is, no, nothing else has. Myself and an army of other ex-PHP developers disagree. > What other language out there is better than PHP for getting simple webpages up and running quickly? This discussion is not just about "getting simple webpages up and running quickly". In fact, it's pretty clear people are talking about developing web applications, and not slapping together a quick and dirty page or two.…

Don't take it personally, but I've seen a lot of confirmation bias from ex-PHP developers. Often from developers who may, thanks to language Y, write more elegant code on the line / function level, but still create the same architectural mess as they did before in PHP. (Rails doesn't save you from creating a mess, neither does the broad separation of concerns of any MVC framework.). There are thousands of ex-PHP deve…

If whats around 5-10 years from now represents the same improvement RoR has made over PHP in the last 5 years, we better be mad when developers working on team projects try to perpetuate RoR's use.

Re: PHP Addiction

#252

Post by tikhonj »

flatline3 wrote: post #211
antihero wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Desktop Linux is actually fucking fantastic if you are prepared to take up messing around with it as a hobby. It requires commitment, time, and and open mind, but fuck, I've just sorted out xmonad, I have my dotfiles syncing via git, and it's bloody amazing . Package management is bliss, and both pacman and apt shit all over homebrew (great as homebrew is), it's absurdly fast even on old hardware, it's free, it's got…

Spending a bunch of time to make my environment work great (and keep it working great) is the opposite of what I'd consider "fantastic". This is why I dropped Linux/BSD on the desktop over a decade ago, and switched to something I don't have to think about, and instead I can simply use to get my actual job done.

In my experience, I have three choices: I can have a poor Linux environment with no work, a better but still mediocre Windows/OS X environment with little work or a good Linux environment with a bit of work.

The reason I don't use Windows or OS X any more (and I've used both extensively in the past) is simple: sure, both are easier to set up (with a new computer, there is no set up). But both are strictly less productive than a good Linux setup is.

The reasoning is simple: setting up a computer is a basically an O(1) operation. Sure the constant may be high, but it's just that: a constant. On the other hand, the drain on productivity of using OS X or Windows is in O(n) where n is how much programming I do. And, happily, I do a lot of programming.

So I've never understood the rather condescending argument of simply getting your actual job done. People using Linux aren't all shortsighted or masochists! We use it because we want to get real work done faster.

Re: PHP Addiction

#253

Post by calinet6 »

__alexs wrote: post #170
calinet6 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never seen a web host include java, and no shared host has enough resources to support the JVM in the first place. It's a similar problem as Ruby and Python, believe it or not.

Is PHP really more memory efficient than the competition? I know it scores better on the computer benchmark game but the non-existent concurrency support and general leakyness of most the extensions (unless they've fixed that these days?) seems like the difference could actually be a lot narrower in practice.

No, that part still might be bad.

The advantage it has is that you can run a ton of hosted sites on one mod_php apache server. With Rails, for example, you have to run an environment. Same with many Python apps, or Java, etc.

So it has the memory advantage of being able to run multiple sites on one environment.

Not that big a deal if you're doing any serious deployment, but a big deal for its ubiquitous nature.

Re: PHP Addiction

#254

Post by gcb » 

   "[php solves problems etc] but it's deeply flawed.
   [...] I promised my next project i would code in something else
   [...] but i went right back to PHP"
This really struck a cord here... Is that the first signal that tomorrow I will be the Cobol guys of yesterday today?

Or is it just a signal that PHP is indeed damn practical for web prototypes that tend to overgrow?

i'm pretty comfortable dumping C and assembly to microcontrolers (kidding, nobody is. damn datasheets full of mistakes) and automating every bit of what i do in bash and python. but i can't get away from PHP for web crap!

Re: PHP Addiction

#255

Post by tikhonj »

crazygringo wrote: post #223

Question: is there a Node.js package out there that lets me write in PHP style, without having to configure anything ? I mean, I install node, I install the node package, I start the server... And then it just looks for an "index.node" file or something in a directory? URL's would map to node files? It would use some kind of templating syntax like or whatever, but the point is, it would be as easy to use as PHP. (Eac…

I don't think that model would fit all that well with node in particular. I'm not sure how would make a templating system like that play well with asynchronous calls. And using synchronous function everywhere won't work. (For example, I couldn't figure out how to read from STDIN synchronously, at all!)

But even if you do decide to use the synchronous functions everywhere, having all your function names end in Sync would just add unnecessary confusion.

So, while you idea certainly doesn't lack merit, it would make more sense for something other than node.

Re: PHP Addiction

#256

Post by [deleted] »

j_col wrote: post #249
ch0wn wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was actually pleasantly surprised by not reading about the usual "webscale" BS in these two articles. Both authors made it very clear that this is not about being able or unable to build something with a given language, but the quality of how you do it.

On what planet is the ability to scale a web application not a quality metric?

[deleted]

Re: PHP Addiction

#257

Post by ch0wn »

j_col wrote: post #249
ch0wn wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was actually pleasantly surprised by not reading about the usual "webscale" BS in these two articles. Both authors made it very clear that this is not about being able or unable to build something with a given language, but the quality of how you do it.

On what planet is the ability to scale a web application not a quality metric?

It sure it, but that's not part of the discussion. Also, when talking about web development, the language used is rarely the bottle neck.

Re: PHP Addiction

#258

Post by tikhonj »

torrenegra wrote: post #232

I am always surprised with the level of argumentation in reference to programming languages. From my perspective, good development paterns and arquitecture are WAY more important than the language. It's similar to writing poetry or novels: picking one language over another won't make you a great writer automatically. Can you imagine Cervantes and Shakespeare arguing whether Spanish or English was better? What's most…

That really isn't a good analogy. Different programming languages are more like different types of prose or poetry: novels, novellas, plays, epic poems and so on. They have a practical impact on how you get your point across.

I imagine authors do have very strong opinions on whether it is better to write a poem or a short story or a novel.

Re: PHP Addiction

#259

Post by adventureful »

Ralith wrote: post #200
ijoyce wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you actually have a real source or numbers, let me know.

Not to mention that the web is not the internet.

Pretty sure almost everybody on HN understands the technical separation between the two.

Sometimes people speak in broad generalities, or use "Internet" when they mean "Web." It is in fact extraordinarily common.

Re: PHP Addiction

#260

Post by [deleted] »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #187
cletus wrote: post #121

Is it my imagination or is Marco the king of writing blog posts that are quick reactions to whatever is trending on HN? The message you should get from this post is that familiarity with one's tools easily trumps any aesthetic flaws (consistency in parameter ordering, naming conventions, etc are really nothing more than aesthetic flaws and not "deep" [1] as the author suggests. After all, human language is inconsiste…

>Desktop Linux is the reason people don't use Linux on the desktop. I'm sorry but it's truly awful and probably won't ever get better. In the absence of product direction you have us geeks making everything configurable Have you tried Unity or G-S lately? I'm not as willing to argue G-S has as clear a direction as Unity, but they both ship with a very limited amount of configurability and they're both insanely easy t…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN