Slashdot Mirror
Freshly Created: comp.lang.php
Agelmar writes: "A newgroup control message was sent out for comp.lang.php today. Many servers already carry the new group, and almost all servers around the globe should carry it within the next day or two. The new group is a wonderful place to turn to for support / questions regarding PHP, and is symbolic of PHP's coming to full power, finally entering the comp.lang.* hierarchy with the rest of the mature languages. (For those who are interested, the new group passed 177-11.) Feel free to drop by the new group, and stick around!"
Finally, PHP users can enjoy the benefits of usenet. Unmoderated trolls, spam, and email harvesting. Oh, and let's not forget the php vs perl vs iMac flame wars. Yeehaw!
-- Ken Kinder ken@_nospam_kenkinder.com http://kenkinder.com/
Actually, yes, I think the Usenet PHP culture does have a more inclusive attitude. In alt.php, the whole "Help, I upgraded to PHP 4.2.x and now my script doesn't work because I didn't read the release notes which clearly state that Register_globals is off by default" does get a bit old, but the question gets answered every time. With that one possible exception, the alt.php / alt.comp.lang.php groups are extremely friendly to new users, willing to go over people's code to find problems / suggest improvements, and the likes. While I would not say that we yern for a flood of newbie posts and Regiser_global posts, I would like to think that the PHP-Usenet community is friendly and willing to help people at all levels of PHP-proficiency.
- Does the PHP culture have a more inclusive bent and willingness to answer the same questions over and over than Perl?
Ack, another one? Read the damn FAQ!I admit it's been a while since I participated in the whole RFC->CFV process but four or five years ago, votes were much bigger. Heck, I think the hardcore of "always vote no" voters - who felt that by voting no they raised the bar - was more than 188.
Again prefacing by noting my ignorance of recent USENET trends, I ask: is USENET getting smaller? More traffic on web-site bulletin boards and less on USENET?
Advice: on VPS providers
It'd be c-hash. c-pound would be "c£"
Can anybody tell me why PHP does not have named parameters?
Why would that be low on the wish-lists?
Table-ized A.I.
(* It takes 10 seconds the first time, and then it's compiled and cached after that, and runs faster than a PHP page. So you see, people who program real world applications, you know, not just your little homepage running off you Lee-Nucks box attached to your little dialup connection, people who do real programming that matters, they accept the initial 10 second load time for stability and performance in the long run. *)
Why do you associate "real programmers" with making *fast* applications? Speed is not always the driving factor, especially on intranets and some B-to-B.
Sometimes you want complexity, sometimes you want speed, and sometimes you want both.
I agree that PHP would probably not be the best bet for say e-bay, but just because it is not good for e-bay does not mean it is a poor choice for other things.
One-size-does-not-fit-all. Viva Choice!
A 10-second delay sounds annoying for development. Too bad they could not make it interpreted for development, and then a compile for the final product. Microsoft has the money for both.
(Microsoft stuff stable? Bwaaaaa haa haaaa ha!)
Table-ized A.I.
(* PHP is a mess. Its flat namespaces are a disaster *)
What do you mean? What is an example?
(* its "object oriented" programming features are a thing to be avoided at all costs *)
Some programmers don't believe in OO. Unless you have some solid evidence that it is objectively better, you should respect that some people just don't like OO and see no benefit in it. OO is like an inkblot: different people see different things in it.
I have complaints about PHP also, but not those. My list includes:
- No named parameters
- Too many functions that do nearly the same thing
(should have used option parameters or named parameters for things like case-sensativity differences.)
- Granularity of error/warning reporting too course. I want to control individual features rather than just a "level".
- Regional-level vars without using a "Global" qualifer. (This one is controversial. I can see both sides of the argument.)
Table-ized A.I.
(* Say I'm using mysql. I call one of the mysql_xxx functions. But to use, say, SQL Server (blech!) I use a mssql_xxx. But I don't import a new package or anything. Everything is just sitting there in one ugly mass of shit. At least do something pragmatic and provide a kind of library import system for these things. there's just too much crap there by default. *)
I am not sure exactly what your complaint is. Calling it a "big ugly mess" is not conveying much. I think Java's API's are a "big ugly mess".
I don't like the database API's either. But, you can wrap them any way you want. (If PHP had named parameters, it would be easier IMO.)
Table-ized A.I.
Imminent death of Usenet predicted.
--Blair
"Dont' worry. It'll outlive the Dow."
Is there such a thing as degrees of Slashdot? (Kinda like that old "degrees of Kevin Bacon" thing.) I don't think I've ever been Slashdotted, but the linked article was written by me (as votetaker), so is that like two degrees from Slashdot?