Bad to see, Laravel still doesn't have an LTS version. Upgrading is a pain.
Might be a business opportunity, ala https://railslts.com/.
Laravel 5 released
71–80 of 114 posts
Re: Laravel 5 released
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having worked with Kohana, CodeIgniter and WP, Laravel is the reason I started writing PHP again. Also being a node developer, Laravel feels at home with Express(both influenced by Sinatra). Artisan command line utility, Migrations for DB version control, Blade template engine and the neat directory structure are some of the things I like apart from the community ofcourse
What is the thing you don't like about Laravel community? (or is this what you say when other PHP devs are involved?)
Sorry, meant to say "some of the things I like and the community ofcourse"
Re: Laravel 5 released
#73Having watched Laravel 5 throughout development, I'm personally unhappy with the fact that most of the nice features of Laravel have been removed. For example, the default version of Laravel 4.x shipped with the "Whoops" PHP stack trace view, which is far superior to the L5-default Symfony stack trace view. Other features were removed too, including the HTML library. Blade tags were changed for no reason. Overall, it…
FUD. The "architecture" change is the bootstrap repository, which has a new folder structure. I know, scary stuff! Folders! The "architecture" has some enhancements to middleware and fleshing out events/commands to a "command bus". Basically, you get more sugar on top of the (mostly) same architecture. Whoops caused a lot of headaches behind the scenes, and did stupid things like convert ALL http error responses to 5…
That's a shitty explanation for dropping Whoops. The first time I remember the discussion of it being dropped got brought up was because of a bug in the framework relating to the assets, where Taylor didn't hesitate to blame Whoops and deleted comments on Github pointing out that the problem was actually in his own code.
It would've been super easy to add some code that sets the HTTP code for Whoops's response if that was the problem - but the fact is you should demand your framework users define their own 404 handlers.
The old Blade tags now escape all HTML, that hardly counts as working.
Re: Laravel 5 released
#74After using Laravel 4 for an internal company tool I have a hard time recommending it (sadly, I was hopeful). I found the docs to be uneven in quality/scope, some key features (mostly around the ORM) missing and the 'feel' to be slightly off. It's hard to quantify, but I have used CakePHP, Yii, Rails (0.9 through 4), Django and plenty of home-grown 'frameworks'. From all those the most cohesive and understandable to…
Maybe it's a matter of taste? I have worked with Symfony2, Zend Framework, Yii, Kohana and Laravel and find Laravel the most intuitive to work with. I like that you can start using it for very rapid prototyping and refactor into more complicated structures as the application grows.
I don't see how Laravel lends itself to "rapid prototyping" than any other framework. Sure, Symfony2 or ZF2 has best practices on how to do things, but at the end of the day it's just MVC - you can skip any best practice you want to just get something done. This isn't unique to Laravel.
Re: Laravel 5 released
#75After using Laravel 4 for an internal company tool I have a hard time recommending it (sadly, I was hopeful). I found the docs to be uneven in quality/scope, some key features (mostly around the ORM) missing and the 'feel' to be slightly off. It's hard to quantify, but I have used CakePHP, Yii, Rails (0.9 through 4), Django and plenty of home-grown 'frameworks'. From all those the most cohesive and understandable to…
What could be those ORM features that you're missing? I've been working with Laravel 4 since before it had documentation when I had to go through all of the code to understand how it works and I know that besides what is described in documentation - there's a number of features that are available, but not listed.
Joining and querying efficiently on relations is probably the most obvious omission.
Re: Laravel 5 released
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it's a matter of taste? I have worked with Symfony2, Zend Framework, Yii, Kohana and Laravel and find Laravel the most intuitive to work with. I like that you can start using it for very rapid prototyping and refactor into more complicated structures as the application grows.
Totally agree. I think that Symfony2 is a pain in the ass. Laravel lets you have something working really fast. Then you can improve the code later on.
Agreed, Symfony2 is great, but I see it being used more in an open source project capacity. Working on it at a company where time frames are key, rapid development is huge. Plus, laravel is far more intuitive and I can ramp up new team members much faster.
Re: Laravel 5 released
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would argue that Symfony is well engineered, not over engineered. The fact that Laravel is already at version 5 demonstrates just how poorly engineered it was in the first place.
Did you just go full retard?
Is that supposed to be funny? Maybe he went all "autistic" too? Perhaps he types like a "Jerry's kid"?
Grow up, and behave like an adult who actually takes care in choosing their words.
Re: Laravel 5 released
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. PHP, especially post 5.4 has matured a lot and offers as many niceties as your favorite blub language. It has its warts, but at this point, nothing worse than what Javascript has for example. That said, while you can write beautiful code in PHP, IMHO, Laravel is not that. It full of "string typing", over-applied and mis-applied Design Patterns, and poorly thought abstractions. It just saddens me that Laravel is…
Can you give an example of a well designed PHP codebase? Are any of the other frameworks (Symfony2, Zend, etc..) better?
Take a look at phabricator's source code, which was originally developed in house at facebook but is currently open sourced. It's not using any of the big MVC frameworks, but it's very well written (despite using PHP 5.2 compatible only syntax) and I think a good example of a well designed PHP codebase.
Re: Laravel 5 released
#79I really like Laravel, it makes getting things started easier. I am glad I finally have a good way to manage my assets from within Laravel so that I don't have to deal with all of that myself every time. The only thing I find Laravel lacking is Web Socket support and every time I tried to implement something I would basically give up and switch to Node.js. Is there anything that can get web sockets working in Laravel?
Re: Laravel 5 released
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it's a matter of taste? I have worked with Symfony2, Zend Framework, Yii, Kohana and Laravel and find Laravel the most intuitive to work with. I like that you can start using it for very rapid prototyping and refactor into more complicated structures as the application grows.
I don't see how Laravel lends itself to "rapid prototyping" than any other framework. Sure, Symfony2 or ZF2 has best practices on how to do things, but at the end of the day it's just MVC - you can skip any best practice you want to just get something done. This isn't unique to Laravel.
I think it tends to do with the marketing. Lots of hand-holding walk-through tutorials and help people get "rapid" prototyping with laravel, moreso than the actual code itself. And, to an extent, when you present yourself as being good for "rapid dev", that's what people will associate with the framework. (by comparison, zf has never promoted itself as allowing for rapid development, AFAIK).