Linked by Kroc Camen on Sat 20th Dec 2008 17:54 UTC
General Development IBM delves into what's new in PHP 5.3: Part-1 shows you the changes to the object-orientated capabilities, and Part-2 shows you the exciting new possibilities with real closures and lambda functions. ["Read more" for Kroc's personal commentary]
Thread beginning with comment 340914
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
tyrione
Member since:
2005-11-21

"I don't really understand why there's so much disdain for PHP. Granted, I wouldn't want to try writing a desktop GUI app with it - but I wouldn't want do that with BASH scripting either."

The disdain, I am guessing, is that too many people try to use it for things it is not designed for. PHP is a server side scripting language for the web. The main purpose when it was designed was to do things you would otherwise need cgi-bin access for, like page counters, etc. It is not for nor intended to be used for writing a desktop GUI application. JavaScript is better suited to that task as it is a client side language, and the code is executed on the local machine instead of on the server. Each has it's own purpose. Too many people try to take one or the other and do everything with it, then bitch about it when it does not work or is too hard to do what they wanted to do. If the right tool was picked in the beginning, this would rarely be an issue.


And if I'm going to write a Desktop GUI application, I'll write for the platform I'm developing on and use their native Frameworks, none of which are Javascript. Both PHP and Javascript lose their value when they try to play the role of other languages; and completely lose credibility when they proclaim themselves better choices.

Reply Parent Score: 1

DrillSgt Member since:
2005-12-02

"And if I'm going to write a Desktop GUI application, I'll write for the platform I'm developing on and use their native Frameworks, none of which are Javascript. Both PHP and Javascript lose their value when they try to play the role of other languages; and completely lose credibility when they proclaim themselves better choices."

I agree. My wording was off a bit, though pretty much meant the same thing.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Languages don't have credibility. They're tools. Just cause a monkey wrench sucks for cutting a piece of lumber doesn't mean it "loses all its credibility". Maybe the manufacturer loses credibility. Maybe the person recommending monkey wrenches for cutting wood loses credibility. But not the tool, its still great for 'fixing' monkeys and smashing walnuts into a gazillion pieces.

Seriously, if anyone proclaims php or javascript to be a better gui builder than native frameworks. They lose credibility.

Reply Parent Score: 2