Yahoo Moving to PHP

Erek Dyskant writes "Yahoo has decided to switch from a proprietary system written in C/C++ to PHP for their backend scripting. Here's the notes from a presentation by a Yahoo engineer at PHP Con 2002."

Comments

Re:Seems like a silly move...

[glwtta]

Hm, if they are rewriting their entire app, wouldn't a move from FreeBSD to some other UNIX(-like thing) be small in comparison?

I mean seriously, I'd love to hear the pros and cons of the "Moving our stuff off of FreeBSD" vs. "Having to maintain everything in PHP instead of J2EE" discussion.

fascinating

[erikdotla]

I'm glad Yahoo is moving to OSS and recognizes the dangers of proprietary software.

I'm a Perl guy, and it was very interesting to note that:

1. Perl beat PHP in all of their performance tests
2. They listed TMTOWDI as a "con" yet,
3. One of the requirements was a language that didn't require a CS degree to use. TMTOWDI helps that, I've noticed.

I'm saddened that Perl has lost a major cheerleader but at least it isn't MS technology.

Even so, I can actually see how PHP is more appropriate. For a site with lots of content, with code mixed in, PHP's "code in the page" model is more ideal. I've had to reinvent something similar in Perl many times, appropriate for whatever I'm working on at the time (I don't like Mason, I prefer my own solution.)

I can see how a solution such as mine - where I prepare an output hash of data then show a webpage by opening and printing the file, using s/// to insert my hash contents with a search/replace method, isn't exactly ideal for Yahoo's high-content needs.

While PerlScript somewhat solves this problem, I remember it being buggy and certainly not as mature as PHP in that regard.

I can't say that I think this is a mistake on Yahoo's part - more like, I think if they wanted to, they could solve Perl's shortcomings and reap the benefits that Perl has over PHP. I guess they're just not interested.

The presentation was a little vague, wish I knew more about the details of their decision.

Re:Seems like a silly move...

[FortKnox]

Because J2EE is slow to develop in

I'd argue that if you use 2.0 EJBs and JBuilder, I could code just as fast as any regular language, but scripting languages are easier to slap code into.
Now, good scripted PHP vs good abstracted OO Java. To code from scratch, PHP'ers could lay down code quicker. Java is easier to maintain and easier to add onto (if properly architected). In the end, I'd call it even ground.

slow at executing

Java 1 was slow. That was like 5 years ago. Go download JBuilder and run it. Made in C++, right? BUZZT! Its Java. Java has come a long way.

J2EE is beautiful in theory, but not in practice

Well, my job is a J2EE developer, so I guess the complex, enterprise level application that is running currently in front of me isn't java, cause it isn't beautiful in practice.

Anyone with that only on their resume will have to shape up the next years, when PHB's stop buying that particular buzzword and move on to the next.

Go look at monster. J2EE is one of the few languages that people have been hiring in throughout the recession. That doesn't sound like something PHB's are gonna just stop hiring.

Re:Maintence must be easier

[dimator]

I can't for the life of me figure out why so many people pick it for web apps.

I guess everyone is smoking crack except you. Seriously, why does MySQL get all this smack talk? I use it because its easy, every language I know of has bindings for it, its fast enough, and its stable. PLEASE spare me your "But XXX does that too, not to mention bla bla bla!" No, I won't switch, because I learned MySQL first (as I'm sure many others have) and so far it hasn't let me down.