php frameworks

Report · Oct 28, 2009

what's your favorite php framework and why?

Report · Oct 29, 2009

I have been reluctant to use PHP frameworks for two reasons:

There's usually a learning curve involved.
If the framework stagnates or is abandoned, you face major problems in migrating to another solution.

The second problem is exactly the dilemma faced by fans of ADDT, which uses its own framework, but is entirely dependent on a specific version of Dreamweaver. Adobe decided to drop ADDT, so it won't work with CS5. Of course, sites made with ADDT will continue to work for many years, but eventually, they will need to be completely rebuilt.

However, the advantage of a framework is that you're not constantly reinventing the wheel. I now use the Zend Framework for specific features, without going the whole hog of converting sites to use it exclusively. I chose Zend because it's got the backing of the company mainly involved in the development and maintenance of PHP, so is likely to survive. Another factor was that it works exclusively with PHP 5, so its classes don't suffer from the need to be backwards compatible with PHP 4, which uses a completely different object model.

I might change my mind in future, but I don't see the advantage of relying entirely on a framework.

Report · Oct 29, 2009

David_Powers wrote:
Of course, sites made with ADDT will continue to work for many years, but eventually, they will need to be completely rebuilt.

Regretfully the pressure of having to migrate to other solutions has become much stronger by now, because ADDT´s underlying PHP functionality has proven to be largely incompatible with PHP version 5.3.0 due to its strong dependency on a variety of features (in particular "call-time pass-by-reference") which are now deprecated.

Cheers,

Günter

Report · Oct 29, 2009

Günter Schenk wrote:

ADDT´s underlying PHP functionality has proven to be largely incompatible with PHP version 5.3.0 due to its strong dependency on a variety of features (in particular "call-time pass-by-reference") which are now deprecated.

The deprecated warnings in PHP 5.3 are simply telling you that a feature is no longer recommended, and will be removed in the next major version (presumably PHP 6). To avoid problems with deprecated error messages, you can add the following to .htaccess:

php_flag display_errors off

Alternatively, you can add this at the top of the main script:

<?php error_reporting(E_ALL ^ E_DEPRECATED); ?>

However, the fact that ADDT relies so heavily on call-time pass-by-reference indicates the age of its underlying code. Ever since the release of PHP 5, the official recommendation has been not to use call-time pass-by-reference. PHP 5 is now five years old, so the writing has been on the wall for a long time.

Report · Oct 29, 2009

David_Powers wrote:
Günter Schenk wrote:

ADDT´s underlying PHP functionality has proven to be largely incompatible with PHP version 5.3.0 due to its strong dependency on a variety of features (in particular "call-time pass-by-reference") which are now deprecated.
The deprecated warnings in PHP 5.3 are simply telling you that a feature is no longer recommended, and will be removed in the next major version (presumably PHP 6).

Sorry for my imprecise wording, that´s what I meant to say 😉

Those of us who tried turning off error reporting the one way or the other had to notice that several ADDT "components" still didn´t work for whatever reasons, and fixing other known "incompatibility" reasons [e.g. replacing the deprecated function split() with preg_split() and whatever else is documented] didn´t help either so far. At this point it seems obvious that trying to overhaul such a complex framework without the help of those who developed it in the first place years ago is a bottomless pit and presumably not worth the effort

However, the fact that ADDT relies so heavily on call-time pass-by-reference indicates the age of its underlying code. Ever since the release of PHP 5, the official recommendation has been not to use call-time pass-by-reference. PHP 5 is now five years old, so the writing has been on the wall for a long time.

Absolutely, and that´s why us ADDT users are - regardless how good it was and what it meant to us - in fact well advised to move on ASAP. Strange that I, the traditional ADDT advocate, have to say this 😉

Report · Oct 30, 2009

Günter Schenk wrote:
At this point it seems obvious that trying to overhaul such a complex framework without the help of those who developed it in the first place years ago is a bottomless pit and presumably not worth the effort

I think you have hit the nail on the head there. One of my original complaints about MX Kollection/ADDT was its complexity. Of course, frameworks are by their very nature complex, but I can open a Zend Framework file and grasp very quickly what's going on. I could never do that with the ADDT files. I remember trying to amend a validation alert, and got completely lost in the code.

I suspect that Adobe looked at the other frameworks available, and decided that it would cost too much to rebuild.

Absolutely, and that´s why us ADDT users are - regardless how good it was and what it meant to us - in fact well advised to move on ASAP. Strange that I, the traditional ADDT advocate, have to say this 😉

It must be painful to have to say it after all the hard work you have put in helping others with ADDT. However, it seems that ADDT is not alone in using outdated code. Both Drupal and Joomla have problems with PHP 5.3. It amazes me that the core development teams didn't keep an eye on what was being planned for PHP 5.3, and update their code accordingly. Thankfully, WordPress works flawlessly on 5.3 as long as PHP is correctly configured with a time zone.

Report · Nov 01, 2009

Not to beat a dead horse, but I found Adobe Dreamweaver Developer Toolbox to be a waste of time. I think Adobe dropped it in recognition that it both couldn't keep up with coding practices, but also that it wasn't all that great. There was nothing in it that wasn't easily found on google, and generally with better code. Also, I felt it forced you into the entire system... i.e. if you wanted to do one tiny thing with it, you were then required to create everything else on that page with it (and along came the entire library of flies to house on the server).

There really isn't a perfect php framework out there right now, in my opinion. Every one of the popular ones seem to lack something. Whether it's too rigid, too flexible, poorly documented, no examples/tutorials, small communities, or just too young to know if it's worth learning, it seems that MS has trumped PHP in the framework department. I still think it's an utter shame that adobe dropped asp.net development. Changing versions of .NET aside, I think this could have been handled. The releases are not coming nearly as fast as they did in the beginning, and I feel software updates could have addressed this. Anyway, that's another thread.

Will dreamweaver ever support the MVC pattern or is that well beyond the target market for this product?

Report · Nov 01, 2009

jon@cmiwebstudio wrote:
I think Adobe dropped it in recognition that it both couldn't keep up with coding practices, but also that it wasn't all that great. There was nothing in it that wasn't easily found on google, and generally with better code.

Lets not forget that ADDT was/is the stripped-down successor of Interakt´s "MX Kollection" suite, which in particular since the Adobe acquisition in early 2007 has been completely put on hold without any further development (despite raising hopes by establishing a Feature Suggestions forum) and improvements of the underlying code base.

My "gut feeling" perception of why Adobe decided to discontinue ADDT is different: Adobe might just have evaluated the current significance and popularity of other PHP frameworks and has probably come to the conclusion that the ADDT framework nowadays just doesn´t stand a chance in these contexts alone. But then again I´m sure that putting a product completely on hold for years (and have the "competition" outrun it) is a self-fulfilling prophecy with an expectable negative outcome.

Report · Nov 02, 2009

Günter Schenk wrote:
I´m sure that putting a product completely on hold for years (and have the "competition" outrun it) is a self-fulfilling prophecy with an expectable negative outcome.

Of course, the reason it was put on hold in the first place could also have been as a result of evaluating the competition and deciding it wasn't worth the investment of time and money to attempt to update it.

Report · Nov 11, 2009

I'd like to think that Joomla has far too much invested in it to be left behind owing to an upgrade of PHP...

Report · Oct 29, 2009

I agree with the assessment about the zend framework. The thing I like about it is the flexibility in that it's really a component library that doesn't even require following MVC style of programming, it's built in 5.1+ practices so it will be relevant, and zend is going no where, so the framework will probably never die unless a new method of rapid development emerges. the thing that's rough with zf is the fact that they want you to buy into their entire system, server, framework, development tools. you don't have to, but it's clear they want you to. further, documentation is decent but examples are not that great (largely due to it's incredibly flexible structure). Dreamweaver makes it so easy to create database driven content, and there are so many classes and snippets you can find online, that I've found it rare that a project requires it.

cakephp - too rigid and bloated but tons of support and examples

codeigniter - very light and fast, but still supports php 4 so you sacrifice

kohana - too young so support and examples are weak

symphony - haven't tried it but seems young as well

yii - too young so support and examples are weak

and an endless list of random framework creations you can find