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

PHP the Wrong Way

phpthewrongway.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 194 posts

Re: PHP the Wrong Way

#51

Post by kijin »

spriggan3 wrote: post #42
RyanZAG wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If its under 50 lines of code for some simple processing, I don't think another developer who comes in would have much trouble. Of course if that 50 lines of code is now 250 because it tries to get around a framework, then instead of finding a PHP developer to help out on the code, you now need a $framework developer. Basically, don't use a framework unless you really do need all the features it gives you. Don't just…

> If its under 50 lines of code for some simple processing It doesn't matter how much lines you write. It has nothing to do with the number of lines but the functionalities and how many developers review that piece of code. Furthermore more a third party codebase is usually the code you don't have to test. You keep on talking about frameworks like it's a bad thing, but all frameworks are not equal in size nor feature…

You still don't need a framework for that. Just use composer to install a bunch of well-tested, feature-rich, but fully independent packages. Start your script with

    include 'vendor/autoload.php';
and add 50 lines of your own code.

Re: PHP the Wrong Way

#52

Post by mgkimsal »

Shanea93 wrote: post #49
pc86 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PHP was the first language I ever used professionally. The code I wrote - the code every single one of my colleagues wrote - was atrocious. We were paid bottom dollar ($30k in 2008) to write absolute shit code. The PHP community in my area was the same. All newbies, all paid barely more than a fast food manager, all writing code that could be taken down by a HS student with Fiddler. I'm sure different experiences exi…

And since then tools such as Composer and Symfyony3 have been released. It's been almost 10 years. Hell, even Magento2 isn't that bad, if you can look past the awkward dependency injection they're in the process of fixing. PHP in 2008 is very different to PHP in 2016. PHP frameworks in 2008 are very different to PHP in 2016. PHP developers in 2008 are very different to PHP in 2016.

Just because those tools exist doesn't mean people use them.

There were decent libraries and high quality code back in 2008 (and 2000) but people didn't necessarily use them.

It's arguable somewhat easier today, but that's a relative term.

If you're FTPing code from BBedit or Dreamweaver up to your godaddy shared hosting and clicking buttons in cpanel... composer/symfony won't help.

Re: PHP the Wrong Way

#53

Post by throwaway1974 »

spriggan3 wrote: post #45
throwaway1974 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The very existence of PHP is a contradiction" Uhm no for me coming from a C background I love PHP since its basically C with a lot of the boring/repetitive stuff abstracted away Good PHP code exists, it only got a bad name due to "web developers" with no formal programming education stumbling across PHP and going "aha this can generate my html etc" and then proceeding to make a pile of mistakes. PHP is a hammer, bla…

> Good PHP code exists, it only got a bad name due to "web developers" with no formal programming education stumbling across PHP and going "aha this can generate my html etc" and then proceeding to make a pile of mistakes. It got a bad name due to the weird nature of PHP which is still a template engine , no matter how much features you had on top. It's like developing webapps in pure HAML, Jinja or Handlebars. PHP a…

PHP "can be" used as a templating engine, but its not the right way to do it nor do you have to use it in that manner.

The correct way is to use Twig for your templates

PHP is alot more than a "templating engine" if thats all you think of it then that is your choice

Re: PHP the Wrong Way

#54

Post by iopq »

Shanea93 wrote: post #36
roblabla wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PHP (the interpreter) used to be filled with bugs, design flaws and incoherences. It got better lately, but IMO it still caries a huge mess of legacy stuff that shouldn't even exist (mysql_real_escape_string anyone?) In this case, both the hammer and the hammer's user can be blamed.

PHP7 has removed a lot of the old cruft and made some small improvements to PHP's idiomatic syntax. One great example is the removal of the mysql_real_escape_string function. http://php.net/manual/en/function.mysql-real-escape-string.p... Another is finally giving us a null coalescing operator, which is a solution for a constant pain point in dealing with raw PHP POST and GET parameters. The full "new features" list…

They removed mysql_real_escape_string function so that you can use mysqli_real_escape_string http://php.net/manual/en/mysqli.real-escape-string.php

Re: PHP the Wrong Way

#55

Post by mrweasel »

yedpodtrzitko wrote: post #4

I just skimmed the website, and I am still not sure if it's meant seriously or if it's some kind of joke? Feels a bit contradictory eg. "dont use framework" vs "make software secure by default". Isn't a security one of the gains of using frameworks, beside other things? You would need to be a security expert to cover all potential security issues when writing something from a scratch.

>Isn't a security one of the gains of using frameworks,

That depends on the scale of what you're building. Generally I would agree with you, but if you building some small, something that would only ever use a small subsection of whatever framework you pick, then you could end up having more issues than if you didn't use a framework.

Just because you aren't using parts of a framework, doesn't mean that security issues in the framework won't affect you.

Let's say your application only ever needs to do one or two queries to a database. It's going to be a whole lot easier for you to lock those two queries down, than securing an entire ORM.

Re: PHP the Wrong Way

#56

Post by juandazapata »

spriggan3 wrote: post #45
throwaway1974 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The very existence of PHP is a contradiction" Uhm no for me coming from a C background I love PHP since its basically C with a lot of the boring/repetitive stuff abstracted away Good PHP code exists, it only got a bad name due to "web developers" with no formal programming education stumbling across PHP and going "aha this can generate my html etc" and then proceeding to make a pile of mistakes. PHP is a hammer, bla…

> Good PHP code exists, it only got a bad name due to "web developers" with no formal programming education stumbling across PHP and going "aha this can generate my html etc" and then proceeding to make a pile of mistakes. It got a bad name due to the weird nature of PHP which is still a template engine , no matter how much features you had on top. It's like developing webapps in pure HAML, Jinja or Handlebars. PHP a…

Replace "PHP" with "JavaScript" and you will have another true statement.

Re: PHP the Wrong Way

#57

Post by ungzd »

PHP community had always been anti-frameworks and anti-libraries. I worked at company where use of third-party libraries was entirely forbidden on most projects. I think it's because:

- Quality of PHP frameworks is low (at least it was last time I used it) - PHP parses and evaluates whole libraries and framework code on each requests. There's proprietary commercial (lol!) software to enable at least caching of bytecode - Packaging just does not work (Pear, now there's Composer, not tried it, seems that it works)

Overall, last time I used PHP i had sense of its community mostly being nihilistic and preferring cowboy programming. It's straight opposite to Java where you will be shamed for not using dependency injection and EJBs for page visits counter. In PHP world you are considered insane misfit if you're writing tests.

For some things advice to just code and don't use unnecessary libs is useful. Recently I had that php/cgi feeling when I worked on small microservice in clojure: no OOP, no MVC, no ORM, no templates, no separating each 10 lines of code to module, just take Ring request and return Ring response which are simple associative arrays. This was a refreshing feeling.

Re: PHP the Wrong Way

#58

Post by mirekrusin »

Paul Graham's quote in "Design Patterns" section actually says nothing or the opposite of what the author is trying to say - Paul says that when he's seeing in the code things (shapes >) that repeat themselves, it's an indication to him that he's missing some macro definition that would build this shape for him so he doesn't need to repeat himself by manually creating it all the time - that he can reuse it (as macro).

How does it relate to design patterns? Does it say not to use them? Absolutely not. It says the opposite, if anything - to recognise patterns in your code. "Design patterns" is just an idea that if you see your patterns repeating themselves (some of your macros tend to be very similar in different projects) then you should give it a name. This way when you explain system to your colleagues it's easier to communicate.

Re: PHP the Wrong Way

#59

Post by RyanZAG »

PolCPP wrote: post #46
sametmax wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no such things as a "general purpose" framework anyone would use for such a small script. This would make no sense.

Also, he mentions that company uses framework, won't scale and start ripping it apart to take unnecesary parts. You don't do that for a 50 line script

You often do though: as in, if each independent problem was handled by a microservice PHP script, it would just be a 50 line script.

But if you've built it on top of a huge framework then you can end up with all the separate parts stuck together in a massive project where you're not even using 75% of the framework.

Re: PHP the Wrong Way

#60

Post by Shanea93 »

mgkimsal wrote: post #43
Shanea93 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really easy to make up statistics on the spot with absolutely no source. I very much doubt that people would be getting paid to write any code if they couldn't implement a single for loop in their primary programming language.

a "single for loop" and a "fibonacci method" are different enough. there are loads of people who take money for working in PHP, and they're closer to pc86's view of things than yours. I wouldn't say "99%" but... there's a lot. A LOT. I've run (and attended) several local tech meetups in my area, and ... there's a huge amount of technical talent, but also a surprising number of people bumbling around with wordpress, d…

Here, fibonacci implemented in a single for loop (obviously, there's cruft in there to modify the array but there's no need for us to be facetious). Feel free to wrap function call around it if the procedural nature makes you feel icky.

  $iterations = 50;
  $numbers = [1,0];
  for($i=0; $i
You seriously expect me to believe that 99% of PHP developers couldn't have written this?
Post reply on HN