Representative line



  • This is all over our code base:

        vendor('in_house/Utility');

    I don't know what's worse...

    a) We use CakePHP
    b) We store in-house code under vendors (CakePHP's fault, actually)
    c) We have a Utility class



  • I believe the non-CakePHP-savvy amongst us would appreciate a little more context.



  •  The Real WTF is CakePHP. It could be a fantasic library if the devs would do ONE thing: DROP PHP 4 SUPPORT!



  • @JamesKilton said:

    It could be a fantasic library if the devs would do ONE thing: DROP PHP 4 SUPPORT!
     

    You mean, like Zend Framework? It has pretty much all the same features, a similar structure, etc, but it's all OO PHP5.



  • @mann_jess said:

    @JamesKilton said:

    It could be a fantasic library if the devs would do ONE thing: DROP PHP 4 SUPPORT!
     

    You mean, like Zend Framework? It has pretty much all the same features, a similar structure, etc, but it's all OO PHP5.

    ZF is so tediously over-complicated.  Half of it consists of wrappers for built-in PHP functions and the other half isn't particularly useful, either.  It's far too Java-like for my tastes.  Why do some PHP devs insist on reimplementing a half-assed Java clone which plays to none of the strengths of the language?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    ZF is so tediously over-complicated.  Half of it consists of wrappers for built-in PHP functions and the other half isn't particularly useful, either.  It's far too Java-like for my tastes.  Why do some PHP devs insist on reimplementing a half-assed Java clone which plays to none of the strengths of the language?
    I'm curious as to which programming languages you consider good (if any).



  • @Zecc said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    ZF is so tediously over-complicated.  Half of it consists of wrappers for built-in PHP functions and the other half isn't particularly useful, either.  It's far too Java-like for my tastes.  Why do some PHP devs insist on reimplementing a half-assed Java clone which plays to none of the strengths of the language?
    I'm curious as to which programming languages you consider good (if any).

    There are no good languages, just awful and okay.

     

    I would consider PHP, perl, C (if it needs to be fast--otherwise, to hell with it), JS, python and (maybe) ruby as okay.  C# also looks okay (for a strongly-typed language) although I have little experience using it.

     

    Java and C++ are the most outstanding awful languages.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    I would consider PHP, perl, C (if it needs to be fast--otherwise, to hell with it), JS, python and (maybe) ruby as okay.  C# also looks okay (for a strongly-typed language) although I have little experience using it.
    I just started toying around with C#, and it seems to be pretty much Java should have been.  I'm pleased thus far.@morbiuswilters said:

     

    Java and C++ are the most outstanding awful languages.

    Amen.



  • I miss C#. I have barely touched it since college, which was like a decade ago.

    Since then I've been working with Java, then PHP and currently with some shell scripting and a tiny bit of Perl.<font face="impact,chicago">  </font><font style="font-style: italic;" face="impact,chicago">What the hell is wrong with me?</font>


    I'll probably give a shot at Ruby in my free time eventually.

    In the mean time, I'm hoping Fan catches on. It looks like a good language.



  • @Zecc said:

    In the mean time, I'm hoping Fan catches on. It looks like a good language.
     

    I so don't want a new language to learn, unless it has some really cool stuff to bring to the table. 

    Out of curiosity, what do you like about Fan? Glancing at the overview, I wasn't particularly impressed. 90% of the syntax is identical to some other language, but the other 10% is vastly different for no discernable reason... the features seem to be nearly identical to other popular languages, so I see little reason to switch to it, and it seems to be trying to integrate lots of things into one, rather than doing one job particularly well. It reminds me of python. But I like python.

    Don't get me wrong. It looks okay... just not good enough for me to want to learn it.

    Am I missing something?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @mann_jess said:

    Am I missing something?

    Yes.
    Do we really need another programming language? [...]  Fan is designed as a practical programming language to make it easy and fun to get real work done.
    It's to make your job fun. FUN! You'll have FUN using it. Or Else.

     



  • @PJH said:

    @mann_jess said:

    Am I missing something?

    Yes.

    The portability between the Java VM and the .Net CLR seems to be me to be a particularly strong point.

    I'm also quite partial towards the concepts of (explicit) Nullable types and type inference (mentioned at the end of that page).
    Actors and namespaces also look like good ideas.

    But to be honest I haven't really tried the language, I've only read these pages describing it.



  • @bstorer said:

    I just started toying around with C#, and it seems to be pretty much Java should have been.

    I have spent a lot of time coding C and C++ and when I first started using C# a few years ago I realized that it was what C++ should have been - most of all no mucking around making class definitions in header files.

    Although I still do have a soft spot for C++ (which is really 4 separate languages rolled into one).



  • @Zecc said:

    I'm also quite partial towards the concepts of (explicit) Nullable types and type inference (mentioned at the end of that page).
    Actors and namespaces also look like good ideas.

     

    C# already has all of this.



  • @Aaron said:

    C# already has all of this.
    Then I miss C# even more than I thought.



  • @Zecc said:

    I believe the non-CakePHP-savvy amongst us would appreciate a little more context.

    CakePHP provides an "app" folder where your controllers/models/views go, and a "vendors" folder where you are supposed to drop third party libraries. They don't really have a proper place to put in house libraries, like a generic autoloaded "lib" folder, so we were forced to make an "in house" vendor.

    I guess technically you are supposed to drop all of your code into the "components" section, but it forces a weird naming convention and as far as I know in 1.1 makes you put every class in a single folder and doesn't let you fake namespacing or anything like that.

    Just thought the idea of "in house" vendor code was funny.

    As for PHP framework, I recommend symfony. It's mature (1.2 is stable), pattern-oriented, and has a very strong model layer (Doctrine). It also has some nice standalone components that you can use in other projects, like a front controller routing framework, forms framework, and request/response framework.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.