I'm in the group described halfway down: was on the Internet during PHP 5, lost interest in it, and moved on [to Go]. I haven't written anything in PHP newer than version 5. Even transitioning from 4 to 5 was quite a big deal, I definitely noticed improvements. But it wasn't enough. I couldn't fit the data set in memory with PHP. But I could do it with Go. I couldn't do parallel computations in PHP in order to respon…
Go with PHP
91–100 of 532 posts
Re: Go with PHP
#92But islanders and continentals dont talk or help each other.
You can obviously build from scratch a blog, a wiki, lms, forum, analytics, e-commerce, survey etc. etc. site in Laravel. The funny thing is that it is quite likely that the leading open source solution for what you want to do is already in php (wordpress, mediawiki, etc) yet you cannot benefit much from it. You definitely cannot import it, but you cant even learn easily from it unless you dig deep into a complicated codebase.
Because php is so old and so adapted to web development people went on and built wonderful things with it, capturing complex domains with all their peculiarities. But that valuable knowledge base remains fragmented and locked within each one of these monoliths.
Going forward there is ever more intense competition between open source language ecosystems. A lot of improvement efforts look inward (making languages faster, safer).
The php community might also be able to draw unique advantage looking more "externally", taping the enormous domain knowledge of all these projects. How that could be done in practice is an open question, but it could become the USP for php, the way data science has become for Python.
Re: Go with PHP
#93As 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…
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…
That's a state of the art WebApp. You old PHP developer!
Re: Go with PHP
#94As 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…
For a framework that is radically different but also PHP-native (since PHP 5), would you like to spend an hour playing with https://github.com/Qbix/Platform ? If you do, please share your experience in a comment. I’d love to hear it. I architected this framework over the last decade :)
But in any case, great job with the platform!
Re: Go with PHP
#95As 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…
> Laravel is [...] reasonably well documented Hard disagree. Sorry, I don't have a computer science degree, why does their documentation make that assumption. I find their docs very hard to grok. PHP.net docs are no-frills no-fuss, straight to the point. Other frameworks are documented very well too, CakePHP comes to mind (at least, when I was using it last in v2 and v3). I can't say I've read the absolute latest ver…
Re: Go with PHP
#96As 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…
> Laravel is [...] reasonably well documented Hard disagree. Sorry, I don't have a computer science degree, why does their documentation make that assumption. I find their docs very hard to grok. PHP.net docs are no-frills no-fuss, straight to the point. Other frameworks are documented very well too, CakePHP comes to mind (at least, when I was using it last in v2 and v3). I can't say I've read the absolute latest ver…
Re: Go with PHP
#97As 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…
For a framework that is radically different but also PHP-native (since PHP 5), would you like to spend an hour playing with https://github.com/Qbix/Platform ? If you do, please share your experience in a comment. I’d love to hear it. I architected this framework over the last decade :)
Your copywriting gives off strong old school enterprise sales vibes with a dash cryptomania. You are not going to get much organic product led growth among the US under 40 crowd here. I suggest taking a look at https://payloadcms.com/ and study their design, execution, and copywriting.
Re: Go with PHP
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, the main problem with PHP in my experience so far has been that it's very memory-hungry and slow (even PHP7/8), especially when coupled with frameworks/ORM magic. I remember after spending some time with Go, I got used to being able to process tens of thousands objects in memory in milliseconds. When I proposed to do the same in PHP, during architecture review, PHP devs thought I'm out of my mind because tha…
That 300ms initialization time sounds like a cache-free execution (aka dev mode). I have symfony projects light on ORM usage (I dislike Doctrine from the bottom of my hearth, but what can you do it's the blessed symfony ORM) and after a cache warmup it handles requests under 100ms. Yes, the frameworks have obscene (java-like) class dependencies that build up during initialization (I'd prefer if there'd be a lighter f…
>there are OPCache tweaks, preloading facilities which help improve the request initialization performance
I remember we disabled some of the settings for preload because we hit a bug which manifested as a segfault due to PHP's shared memory space for preload getting corrupted under a high load.
In any case, everything is fast and usually doesn't require a lot of tuning in Go out of the box.
However, I do love PHP's shared nothing architecture for the reasons of memory isolation: we have thousands of B2B tenants and with PHP, I'm confident we won't accidentally spill one company's data into another company's account. Things like when ChatGPT exposed your conversations to random people because a bug in the Redis connection pool inside Python's shared memory space returned a connection for a different user, due to a race condition.
Re: Go with PHP
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Laravel is [...] reasonably well documented Hard disagree. Sorry, I don't have a computer science degree, why does their documentation make that assumption. I find their docs very hard to grok. PHP.net docs are no-frills no-fuss, straight to the point. Other frameworks are documented very well too, CakePHP comes to mind (at least, when I was using it last in v2 and v3). I can't say I've read the absolute latest ver…
What "computer science terms" did you encounter, that you did not understand? I also do not have a CS degree, but every term that I've encountered in the Laravel docs I found easy to search for. Just don't rely on Wikipedia for explanations, for CS (and mathematics) subjects Wikipedia seems to be useful only to those already versed in the field.
eg. https://laravel.com/docs/5.8/contracts – talks a lot about how Contracts are powerful additions (like all the other features of Laravel, the docs are good at telling you they're powerful) and the examples show just some barebones code that doesn't really do much without a lot more work. The examples in the documentation seem to be more on the side of being some code snippets that don't convey much context.
Additionally, there's lots of "congratulatory" text in the documentation ("Laravel has a powerful feature called ", "in Laravel adding is actually really simple", "some developers enjoy using ". You simply don't see this in PHP.net's docs, it just tells you what the function / feature is, gives you examples that work straight out of the box, lets you know of any pitfalls or differences in PHP versions to watch out for, and there's a whole list of comments contributed by other PHP devs spanning years, that are up/downvoted.
Another example of powerful documentation was that I learnt what MPTT is, and how to implement it effectively, purely from CakePHP docs back in the day (I'm talking v2 here). I can't see how anything as remotely useful would be able to be taught from Laravel docs alone; for someone who doesn't have a computer science degree, there would be a LOT of tabs open, full of rabbit holes that need to be explored. This is not effective documentation in my eyes.
The difference between these sets of documentation is like night and day to me. The Laravel docs needs to stop patting itself on the back, and be more like other software projects' documentation.
Don't get me wrong, I love working with Laravel, it is powerful. My issue is with the documentation, which leaves a lot to be desired.
Re: Go with PHP
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it's typed (now) To note, you'll need strict mode for type hints to be useful. https://www.php.net/manual/en/language.types.declarations.ph... The fun part is, instead of going for a generic strict mode system we would have expected, PHP went pragmatic: as most application won't be 100% strict typed, you need to declare it file by file, the icing on the cake being that the restriction applies on the caller of the f…
> To note, you'll need strict mode for type hints to be useful This is not really true — those type hints can be read by static analysis tools, preventing you from many of the issues that would also be caught in strict mode at runtime.
Unfortunately, it’s taking far too long for Laravel to catch up so parts of its API are a black hole for types.
Especially things like request input, which returns a union of string and array as opposed to using a conditional return type.
You end up with assertion soup every time you touch Laravel so over time the project uses less and less of it.
A well-typed framework and set of libraries would be very nice.