PHP or COLDFUSION

[Jeffrey Silverman]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 23:39:36 -0700, English Teacher wrote:
[color=blue]
> Which would be more useful to learn, PHP or COLDFUSION? I know Coldfusion
> is popular in the work force. Is PHP?
>
> Thanks![/color]

Whats the deal with the selection of crossposted NGs? rec.woodworking ??
--
Jeffrey D. Silverman | jeffrey AT jhu DOT edu
Johns Hopkins University | Baltimore, MD
Website | http://www.wse.jhu.edu/newtnotes/

[Leicaddict]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

EnglishTeacher@ ModernEnglish.c om (English Teacher) wrote in message news:<b06436f6. 0310202239.106b ee49@posting.go ogle.com>...[color=blue]
> Which would be more useful to learn, PHP or COLDFUSION? I know
> Coldfusion is popular in the work force. Is PHP?
>
> Thanks![/color]

They are both useless. Learn MS dotnet. C# or VBnet. That is the
future for at least the next 10 years.

[Jim Moseby]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

"Leicaddict " <Leicaaddict@uw photographer.ne t> wrote in message
news:71fc6b93.0 310280111.707f6 49e@posting.goo gle.com...[color=blue]
> EnglishTeacher@ ModernEnglish.c om (English Teacher) wrote in message[/color]
news:<b06436f6. 0310202239.106b ee49@posting.go ogle.com>...[color=blue][color=green]
> > Which would be more useful to learn, PHP or COLDFUSION? I know
> > Coldfusion is popular in the work force. Is PHP?
> >
> > Thanks![/color]
>
> They are both useless. Learn MS dotnet. C# or VBnet. That is the
> future for at least the next 10 years.[/color]

+--------------+
| Please Don't |
| Feed the |
| T R O L L! |
+--------------+

[remmuh]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

Leicaaddict@uwp hotographer.net (Leicaddict) wrote in message news:<71fc6b93. 0310280111.707f 649e@posting.go ogle.com>...[color=blue]
> EnglishTeacher@ ModernEnglish.c om (English Teacher) wrote in message news:<b06436f6. 0310202239.106b ee49@posting.go ogle.com>...[color=green]
> > Which would be more useful to learn, PHP or COLDFUSION? I know
> > Coldfusion is popular in the work force. Is PHP?
> >
> > Thanks![/color]
>
> They are both useless. Learn MS dotnet. C# or VBnet. That is the
> future for at least the next 10 years.[/color]

hmm, I can't imagine Coldfusion and PHP being rendered useless. Out of
curiosity, why do you say this.?

[Jim Moseby]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

"remmuh" <Kyle@digitaley eon.com> wrote in message
news:851c72e4.0 310281357.5daf1 898@posting.goo gle.com...[color=blue]
> Leicaaddict@uwp hotographer.net (Leicaddict) wrote in message[/color]
news:<71fc6b93. 0310280111.707f 649e@posting.go ogle.com>...[color=blue][color=green]
> > EnglishTeacher@ ModernEnglish.c om (English Teacher) wrote in message[/color][/color]
news:<b06436f6. 0310202239.106b ee49@posting.go ogle.com>...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Which would be more useful to learn, PHP or COLDFUSION? I know
> > > Coldfusion is popular in the work force. Is PHP?
> > >
> > > Thanks![/color]
> >
> > They are both useless. Learn MS dotnet. C# or VBnet. That is the
> > future for at least the next 10 years.[/color]
>
> hmm, I can't imagine Coldfusion and PHP being rendered useless. Out of
> curiosity, why do you say this.?[/color]

Cause he's a troll. Don't feed him and he'll go away. Just look at all the
groups he crossposted to. Typical troll.

[Adam Cameron]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

>> Which would be more useful to learn, PHP or COLDFUSION? I know[color=blue][color=green]
>> Coldfusion is popular in the work force. Is PHP?[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
>They are both useless. Learn MS dotnet. C# or VBnet. That is the
>future for at least the next 10 years.[/color]

I've had quite a bit of trouble getting any of these technologies to
work on my Unix servers. Can someone point me at the relevant docs so
I can read up on how to do it?

Adam

[Adam Haskell]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION


"Adam Cameron" <adam_junk@hotm ail.com> wrote in message
news:9lrtpvkbe5 ls70mi73lqn98st hs5kog2o4@4ax.c om...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> Which would be more useful to learn, PHP or COLDFUSION? I know
> >> Coldfusion is popular in the work force. Is PHP?[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> >They are both useless. Learn MS dotnet. C# or VBnet. That is the
> >future for at least the next 10 years.[/color]
>
> I've had quite a bit of trouble getting any of these technologies to
> work on my Unix servers. Can someone point me at the relevant docs so
> I can read up on how to do it?
>
> Adam
>[/color]

Didn't you get the latest memo? Unix is dead, Microsoft will be the only
thing available...

[Adam Cameron]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

>> I've had quite a bit of trouble getting any of these technologies to[color=blue][color=green]
>> work on my Unix servers. Can someone point me at the relevant docs so
>> I can read up on how to do it?[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
>Didn't you get the latest memo? Unix is dead, Microsoft will be the only
>thing available...[/color]

I remember now! [slaps head, switches of all Unix boxes].

Adam

[Terence]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

English Teacher wrote:
[color=blue]
> Which would be more useful to learn, PHP or COLDFUSION? I know
> Coldfusion is popular in the work force. Is PHP?
>
> Thanks![/color]

I've been working with CF since version 3.1 and have been gainfully
employed as a CF developer up to this day. I started learning PHP when
version 4 first came out. My current employer hired me on the basis of
my knowledge for both. Here at the university, we actively use both
technologies. We run them both of them on Solaris with iPlanet. At the
last place I worked, we ran CF5 on Windows with IIS and since I use
windows for my development workstation, I run PHP with Apache on there.
My latest production PHP app runs on a Windows box with Apache.

The answer to your query lies in how you code. The biggest issue is
maintenance. Both languages provide ample opportunity to bugger things
up in a big way, particularly for novices. The end result is always a
nightmare. I have to say, as a language, I think PHP is more
powerful/capable (without having to resort to Java). PHP also allows you
to create spagetti code. But again, it up to you. An OO approach to your
PHP coding can avoid this.

In my experience, the worst code however, has always been from CF
developers. Part of the reason for this is a traditional programming
model is almost NEVER used <says he as he steps into his asbestos suit>.
And no, Fusebox doesn't count, there's no traditional model to compare.
I've seen a few other CF frameworks as well but they are all so
"work-around-ish". Don't get me wrong, they are much, much better than
standard CF code, but they succeed inspite of CF rather than because of
it. There are crappy framework a-plenty for PHP too, but there are also
some good ones -- and they are not work-arounds for the language.

My first choice is always PHP, mainly because it allows me to use a
traditional programming paradigm -- Object Oriented design. While PHP is
not an OO language, it allows you to orient your design as such. Now
that CF has CFC, you can write OO apps in CF too -- but it's "clunky".
The mountains of code argument used earlier is a weak one, it can easily
be the other way around. A 100% OO app in CF would need mountains of
ascii of CFCs. Quite often I have to generate mountains of ascii in CF
to achieve the same thing I could have done with just a few lines in
PHP. As with any programming, the key to avoinding mountains of code is
to promote code re-use -- OO lets you do this. That's why there are
class libraries already avilable such as PEAR, Eclipse (PHP library),
and XAO (for XML/XSLT apps).

Personally, I think CF is good for quick construction of web services
using CFCs, particularly because it has such good database support. For
everything else, there is PHP.

As far as learning curve is concerned, PHP is like a regular programming
language, CF is not (no, the script tag way is too weak). So if you've
ever written another language like say, Javascript, you will already be
familiar with most of the syntax (ie. ie, curly braces etc). If you are
familar with Basic (ie. VB) then you can use the "basic" style syntax
available in PHP too. CF syntax is good for, well, CF.

If you prefer tags to curly braces and you don't plan on doing much
programming, then learn CF. CF is highly functional and really quick for
small apps. Unless you learn some obscure CF framework, it's a pain to
maintain for medium to large apps. Also, lucky for CF users, Macromedia
came along, so now CF has a future.

If you plan on building bigger apps down the road, then PHP will give
you the support you need. You can most cirtainly build big apps in CF as
well, but then you also need tonnes of expertise to do it properly (as
with anything) and tonnes of money to pay for all the licences on your
clusters. MM products are nice, but always expensive.

Also, don't buy into the whole Java/J2EE argument that you need this for
enterprise stuff. Java is nice, but for web apps, PHP can do pretty much
anything and everything without a snippet of Java in sight (even though
it supports Java in at least 2 ways).

And another thing, there are thousands of [free] PHP apps you can just
download and adopt if you are that way inclined. For instance, CF has 10
projects listed at freshmeat.net and PHP has 2118
I'm sure there I sites which better support CF freeware, but there's no
way CF will have the variety that PHP has. And all this without a
marketing department...

references:
http://pear/php.net (PEAR is the official class library)
http://www.students.cs.uu.nl/people/voostind/eclipse/ (unified class
library with strong emphasis on design patterns)
http://xao-php.sourceforge.net/ (Standards compliant, high-level XML
functionality. It's a class library that is also a framework.)
http://dietrich.ganx4.com/nusoap/index.php (nice SOAP class for PHP --
there are lots to choose from)
There are tonnes more, these ones came to mind...

Furthermore, PHP's function library is far far far superior to any
version of CF. Just check this out...

http://www.php.net/manual/en/funcref.php

unbeatable... this is where PHP craps all over Java and CF and .NET for
web apps.

PHP4's exception handling sucks. While I can makes lots of complaints
about individual features of CF, PHP exception handling blows goats.
Happily, PHP5 beta2 is out so there is light at the end of the tunnel.
Actually, come to think of it, the PHP developers really keep the hammer
down when it comes to supporting the product. We all had to wait
waaaaayyyy too long for that patch from MM which was to fix <CFEXEC/>
and <CHTTP/> issues. Not to mention the fact that as an enterprise,
having access to the source code really reduces the risk of relying on
any given product... For instance, we had an issue with the iPlanet PHP
module, we looked at the source, made some suggestions, and a fix was in
the next patch release -- impressive stuff -- all without money changing
hands. Try that with MS or MM or even Sun, IBM or Oracle :)
wow, you actually read this far :/
get back to work...
;)

[Karim]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:14:39 +1100, Terence wrote:
[color=blue]
> Furthermore, PHP's function library is far far far superior to any
> version of CF. Just check this out...
> http://www.php.net/manual/en/funcref.php
> unbeatable... this is where PHP craps all over Java and CF and .NET for
> web apps.[/color]

Can you be more specific on why you think PHP is better than .NET? Did you
actually use ASP.NET?


--
Karim
http://www.cheapesthosting.com - Affordable hosting since 1998

[Terence]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

Karim wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:14:39 +1100, Terence wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>Furthermore , PHP's function library is far far far superior to any
>>version of CF. Just check this out...
>>http://www.php.net/manual/en/funcref.php
>>unbeatable. .. this is where PHP craps all over Java and CF and .NET for
>>web apps.[/color]
>
>
> Can you be more specific on why you think PHP is better than .NET? Did you
> actually use ASP.NET?
>
>[/color]

I pointed out _one aspect_ where php "craps all over" ASP.NET
I didn't say that PHP craps all over ASP.NET in every way. That aspect
is functionality.

Did you even take a look at the http://www.php.net/manual/en/funcref.php
page?

PHP supports functionality for a whole range of things. It's the range
that is impressive. No other web-based technology currently matches this
range of pre-built, readily-avilable functionality.

In answer to your second query, I've only had the chance to do some
tutorials in ASP.NET (using C#) and read a book on it. I haven't had any
commercial experience unfortunately. At the moment, I'm getting
commercial experience with .NET because I am writing some windows
services in C# (involving databases and Windows Media Encoders). I know
enough about ASP.NET to know that it doesn't have as much functionalty
as PHP :)


Let's not confuse functionality with architecture. I'm not particularly
fond of the ASP framework -- architecturally speaking (Don't even get me
started on it's reliance upon IIS, which alone is enough to cross it off
my shopping list). It's simply one architecture in a world where there
are hundreds and it isn't neccesarily the best. Basically Java Server
Faces (Sun's impending official web apps framework (with it's roots in
Apache Struts)) is almost the same thing -- server-side events, HTML
controls etc. and it's not my cup of tea. I'm not particularly fond of
Apache Struts and front-controllers either.
The best framework I've seen to date is Apache Cocoon. It craps all over
ASP.NET architecture in every way. It's separation of content and
layout (through usage of a W3C standard) is designed brilliantly.
Pipelines are brilliant, the whole sitemap concept is brilliant.
Furthermore, it is extremely mature, it's been out virtually since the
birth of XSLT. It has many mature generators giving brilliant
out-of-the-box functionality for things like database access and PDF
generation. It's a good deal less prescriptive and restrictive about
request handling -- you don't need to worry about "actions" (front
contoller) or "events" (why rely on "control" logic), you could use
directory paths if you felt like it or any ther pattern match to direct
requests. Any serious web developer would be doing themselves a favour
by checking out Cocoon.

[Judas]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

Rapid application development. (ColdFusion)
Messing with code. (PHP)

[Lester Horwinkle]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

I've embedded my commentary ...

"Terence" <tk.lists@fastm ail.fm> wrote in message
news:3FA76DFF.4 080508@fastmail .fm...[color=blue]
> English Teacher wrote:[/color]
[color=blue]
> The answer to your query lies in how you code. The biggest issue is
> maintenance. Both languages provide ample opportunity to bugger things
> up in a big way, particularly for novices. The end result is always a
> nightmare. I have to say, as a language, I think PHP is more
> powerful/capable (without having to resort to Java). PHP also allows you
> to create spagetti code. But again, it up to you. An OO approach to your
> PHP coding can avoid this.[/color]
Agreed. PHP is a coding language, with clever web server integration.
Whereas CF is a web development environment, with (previously) weak
programming constructs.
[color=blue]
> In my experience, the worst code however, has always been from CF
> developers. Part of the reason for this is a traditional programming
> model is almost NEVER used <says he as he steps into his asbestos suit>.[/color]
Instead, perhaps it's because the web began as a document
transport/presentation medium, and only later became an application
environment. Therefore, early CF developers were good content-oriented
people, not good software developers. They'd be the first to jump onto the
CF bandwagon ... maybe, he says, as he dons his fiberglass-insulated garment
.... no asbestos for me, thanks.
[color=blue]
> Personally, I think CF is good for quick construction of web services
> using CFCs, particularly because it has such good database support.[/color]
The beauty of CF is that you can do mountains of work with a quick click
click click. Sure, I was a software developer for 20 years and wrote all
sorts of code. But I appreciate the fact that "click" is faster, cheaper,
easier. And anything that can be reduced to a no-brainer click ought NOT to
be done the old, manual way by someone re-writing code that thousands of
others have already written. Sure, class libraries foster reuse. But "click"
fosters it even better.
[color=blue]
> As far as learning curve is concerned, PHP is like a regular programming
> language, CF is not (no, the script tag way is too weak). So if you've
> ever written another language like say, Javascript, you will already be
> familiar with most of the syntax (ie. ie, curly braces etc). If you are
> familar with Basic (ie. VB) then you can use the "basic" style syntax
> available in PHP too. CF syntax is good for, well, CF.[/color]
Agreed. PHP is a natural. Structurally, it comes from the same mold as
C/C++/VB/JavaScript/etc.
[color=blue]
> If you plan on building bigger apps down the road, then PHP will give
> you the support you need. You can most certainly build big apps in CF as
> well, but then you also need tonnes of expertise to do it properly (as
> with anything) and tonnes of money to pay for all the licences on your
> clusters. MM products are nice, but always expensive.[/color]
I'm not sure how big your "tons" of money are. But cost should not be a
problem. The difference between free PHP with its publicly-available
add-ons, and the for-a-price products such as ColdFusion comes to, what? A
few thousand dollars?

For "just me" at home, that's a big difference. My labor is free, but bought
software costs real money.

But in the corporate world, labor costs far outweigh the software. CF
licensing is almost in the petty cash range, while labor runs at least $50 a
hour here (Florida), and much higher in some places. The hours saved on a
simple project will pay for CF and DW licenses. So the "free-ness" of
open-source software is not an attraction for me, as a corporate employee.
There's really no savings there.
[color=blue]
> Also, don't buy into the whole Java/J2EE argument that you need this for
> enterprise stuff. Java is nice, but for web apps, PHP can do pretty much
> anything and everything without a snippet of Java in sight (even though
> it supports Java in at least 2 ways).[/color]
Agreed. Java is too big. It's relatively difficult to learn. It changes over
and over again, with every release.

And Java is only one piece of the web development kit.

For that matter, so is PHP. I find that CF/DW is more complete than Java or
especially PHP. Likewise, WebSphere and BEA WebLogic are more complete.

[R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

Karim <karim3411@yaho o.moc> wrote in message news:<yw15yfn5q g6q.16x05a4dfjc mj.dlg@40tude.n et>...[color=blue]
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:14:39 +1100, Terence wrote:
>[color=green]
> > Furthermore, PHP's function library is far far far superior to any
> > version of CF. Just check this out...
> > http://www.php.net/manual/en/funcref.php
> > unbeatable... this is where PHP craps all over Java and CF and .NET for
> > web apps.[/color]
>
> Can you be more specific on why you think PHP is better than .NET? Did you
> actually use ASP.NET?[/color]

BTW, have you ever used the cool PHP?

---
"If there is a God, he must be a sadist!"
Email: rrjanbiah-at-Y!com

[Karim]

Re: PHP or COLDFUSION

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:18:19 +1100, Terence wrote:
[color=blue]
> Karim wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:14:39 +1100, Terence wrote:
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>>Furthermor e, PHP's function library is far far far superior to any
>>>version of CF. Just check this out...
>>>http://www.php.net/manual/en/funcref.php
>>>unbeatable.. . this is where PHP craps all over Java and CF and .NET for
>>>web apps.[/color]
>>
>>
>> Can you be more specific on why you think PHP is better than .NET? Did you
>> actually use ASP.NET?
>>
>>[/color]
>
> I pointed out _one aspect_ where php "craps all over" ASP.NET
> I didn't say that PHP craps all over ASP.NET in every way. That aspect
> is functionality.[/color]

PHP might have more functionality but .NET is geared towars Windows only as
expected from all MS products. No.. you will not find functions that
support MySQL or Postgres but if you're on Windows, you really don't care
and if you do want to use something like MySQL, there are free drivers out
there that you can use. It's not a dead end.

I haven't used PHP but I am pretty sure it doesn't support server controls
like a datagrid where you can drag and drop a grid, set some properties and
have a grid where you can insert, edit and update values, do validation,
sort and paginate right away. I am sure PHP can do all this but it's not
going to be done in as productive way like asp.net. You will need to a ton
of code where asp.net already has it done for you and if you need to etend
on a server control, the open hooks are there.
.NET is *fully* OO while php 5 is going there. You have visual
inheritance, code behind in a file seperated from the html file...etc.


php has a ton of functions but you're still writing spaghetti code which is
hard to maintain.

When Mono on Linux is fully ready, then the ".NET works only in Windows"
excuse is not going to fly anymore. Besides, when you create a website, it
doesn't matter where it's running on since all you care is that your site
works right under all the common browsers. If it runs in Windows only, you
hire people who know Windows and .NET to maintain it and they are plenty
and more every day. .NET is not some old legacy language/framework where
you worry that it it runs on a certain OS only. To many people and
companies, cross platform compatibility is not an issue, specially in
Windows only shops.



--
Karim
http://www.cheapesthosting.com - Affordable hosting since 1998