Robert and everyone: PLEASE do not reply to list AND the sender, at least not when I'm the sender. I don't need double copies of every message in every thread I participate in. Thanks. On Saturday 25 August 2007, Robert Cummings wrote: > > There is no way to respond to the above request, because you're > > automatically discounting features as "an individual bent". That makes > > your position non-falsifiable (cannot be proven or disproven), and > > therefore irrelevant. > > I'm indicating that features should not be the sole basis of the > argument since they are indeed an individual bent. As such it helps to > focus the argument to what is important-- the efficacy of PHP4 versus > the efficacy of PHP5. Thus my position is open to falsifiability and not > as you say "irrelevant". > > > What does PHP 5 offer? > > > > - Exceptions. No you don't have to use them, but they are a useful tool. > > > > - Real OOP. No, you don't have to use it, but it is a useful tool. > > Ooooooooooooooh, the magical "Real OOP". Please go find me a definition > of "Real OOP". PHP4 is as real OOP as any other OOP. Just because it > lacks some devices available in other OOP implementation does not > disqualify it in any way from being OOP. > > > - Prepared statements in MySQL (mysqli) or cross-database (PDO). You > > really should be using them! > > There are pros and cons to prepared statements: Sure there are. But if all you have is the mysql_ extension, you don't get to make that choice. > > - filter extension. No you don't have to use it, but it's a useful tool > > for security. > > Sure, but you can filter your variables for security without it. Sure you can. You could do it in C, too, and then you don't need PHP's overhead. The "you can accomplish it without this tool" argument carries no weight since the whole point of the tool is "but I can accomplish it in far less time with less code and fewer bugs with it". You can build a house using nothing but a hand saw, but a buzz saw makes it oh so much easier. :-) > > - SPL. You can leverage SPL without having a fully-OOP architecture. In > > fact, I find it most useful to be able to "have my procedural cake and > > OOP icing, too". No, you don't have to use it, but it's a useful tool. > > But it doesn't offer much to a fully procedural architecture. Have you tried it? > > - SimpleXML and the DOM extension. XML handling that doesn't suck ass. > > No you don't have to use them, but if you're doing anything with XML > > processing you will thank the gods that you did. > > I already have an XML API that works fine in PHP4. There's only a narrow sliver of use cases where I'd say PHP 4's primitive SAX parser "works fine". Perhaps you're only working in those, but if you're doing anything more complex then the extra tools make life a hell of a lot easier. > > - A few dozen new utility functions. Sure they could be/have been > > reimplemented in PHP 4 user-space, but they're not as fast as when > > implemented in C. > > True, but that's a compatibility / performance tradeoff. And there > doesn't need to be a tradeoff. You can test for PHP4 and include the PHP > versions if PHP4 is active. Otherwise default to PHP5 C implementations. You have to be careful how you structure the code, though. Conditional function definitions still get compiled even if they aren't "defined", so there's no memory savings. > > The GoPHP5 project is not about forcing people to use OOP. It's about > > ensuring that developers have a full tool box available to them when > > writing code. If you're still using PHP 4 now, then your tool box is > > only half-full. Get on PHP 5 to get the other half. > > I never said gophp5 was about forcing the use of OOP. It just strikes me > as an unnecessary push when market forces will perform the appropriate > pushing at the appropriate time. GOPHP5 is an artifical push for a > faster move towards an inevitable future. GoPHP5 *is that market force*. It's developers saying "OK, we're sick of PHP 4, it's time for PHP 5, get with the program". Hosts that don't keep up, well, that's capitalism. It's well past the "appropriate time". And actually, what I've found from GoPHP5 is that the Nexen stats showing 20% PHP 5 deployment on a good day are bunk. There's no shortage of PHP 5 compatible hosts, including the big names. We've been holding ourselves back needlessly. > > The other factor is that those writing code that goes on servers they > > don't have absolute control over (I dare say most of us) are bound by > > *others'* refusal to upgrade to PHP 5. If I'm on a shared host, I'm > > stuck with whatever that host is running, even if it's ancient. > > I've nothing against running your stuff in PHP5, nothing against it at > all. But I don't see what the problem is with maintaining PHP4 > compatibility while enjoying PHP5 if you so choose to use PHP5. Because it is not possible to use SimpleXML or SPL or PDO etc. while maintaining PHP 4 compatibility, unless you write two completely separate implementations with a common facade. That's a complete waste of my time. I can't enjoy PHP 5's exceptions (if I am so inclined) without cutting off PHP 4 servers. While there were lots of PHP 4 servers, most mass-market projects were too afraid of cutting off their own install base to do so. Now, though, they have enough "market force" in toto that it's not a big risk to open up to PHP 5 features. > > http://gophp5.org/faq > > *waves a tiny "gophp5" flag* Yaaaaaaaay! :-) -- Larry Garfield AIM: LOLG42 larry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ICQ: 6817012 "If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it." -- Thomas Jefferson -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
