PHP isn't programming. It's copypasta and guesswork.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-19 9:17
>>5
The fact clueless people copypasta PHP code doesn't make it bad. Quit trolling.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-19 9:49
>>6
No you don't get it. PHP is copypasta. Look at PHP books, it's ONE HUGE COPYPASTA. no one working with PHP has the vaguest clue what he's doing, just copypasta and hit F5 until 505 Internal error goes away and it magically works.
>>7
My good man, don't make public your idiocy. First, if you need a book to learn the smallest and best documented of the popular scripting languages for web development, you must be really stupid and no wonder why your code sucks or you think PHP is about copypasta. Second, the fact you and many 16 year olds "Welcome to my web sight"-makers are clueless about PHP doesn't mean everybody is. Third, errors you get for wrong PHP are not 505 Internal error. Fourth, as >>8 said, you don't need a book to learn other programming languages either, unless you fail (in which case books will only provide copypasta material anyways).
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-19 14:00
typical PHP programmers: MUST AVOID BOOKS BLBLBL BOOKS EVIL BLBLBL
Try opening one and reading it for a change. Just because you're 12 and your mommy won't lend you her CC doesn't mean books suck, you functionally illterate retard.
There is this thing which us highly productive adults value about books as opposed to random joe's online articles: QUALITY. That's right, the reasoning is that it takes a brain (something you clearly lack) and experience (ha ha) to actually publish a book, hence books will always be superior. Moreover, TIME IS MONEY, child. I don't have the time to read 101 incomplete, outdated PHP pages written by children on dope. The fact that PHP books suck means only one thing: everything online about PHP sucks even more. QED.
I use a compiler licensed using the GNU GPL with certain exceptions, and I don't think my mother has one.
I don't see why I can't simply read the language specifications and the manual or source code to learn. Books are usually written by incompetent Certified Idiots that are in for the money.
BTW, I mix functional-style code with OO and structured code.
There is this thing which us highly productive adults value about books as opposed to random joe's online articles: QUALITY.
And before you keep praising your tiny e-penis, if you had taken a look at PHP books and the official PHP docs at php.net you'd realize what's the quality thing here. If you need anything more than php.net, like some random guy explaining the ABC of Hello World in a 1000 pages book, you fail miserably.
Moreover, TIME IS MONEY, child.
Exactly. After knowing a variety of languages including Perl, I learnt PHP in about 2 days. Of course, I perfected it with time.
>>12
No fucking wonder, it's the most popular language for web development (though not the only one where this may happen).
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-19 17:53
>>14
It is however the only one that has like 6 or 7 functions just to escape strings to be injected in SQL queries and that still manages to get it wrong.
>>BTW, I mix functional-style code with OO and structured code.
Must be a wonder to maintain. On the other hand, why would anyone maintain 200 lines of PHP gibberish written by an insignificant little child?
PHP = failure
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-20 2:26
>>15
Only one is worth using though, DB_common::quoteSmart().
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-20 3:31
>>17
Not really; I just don't shy away from lists and when I need to perform operations on them that would be better done in a functional way I do it right away. Heavy use of lists and functional-style bits and functions coexist with functions and objects.
Stop trolling, I'm tired of being called a kid by somebody who is obviously younger and less experienced than I am. I don't even know if you have a real job or you are some kind of failed basement dweller.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-21 23:53
>>18
If you are using a function to escape things in SQL, you are probably doing it wrong (the interface should escape all the parameters for you, instead of making you interpolate them into the string yourself)
>>19
PHP does not really support a functional paradigm. Its anonymous functions are not really anonymous, have no supporting syntax (function body is a fucking string of code), and definitely do not support lexical closures. What sort of 'functional-style' stuff are you doing?
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-22 4:12
>>20
Anonymous functions and eval are a pain, but I still prefer to use short bits of them (when they don't get messy/quote hell/escape hell) to more verbose, less productive and maintainable solutions. I use them as well as variable functions in combination with array_map, array_walk, array_reduce, array_filter, and other functions of my own.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-22 5:34
>>21
Just use Lisp or Ruby or some other language that supports your programming style.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-22 6:20
>>22
I do when I can, but I'm asked to use PHP because we already have a large Java and PHP codebase to maintain and if I start using other languages, they'll have a harder time looking for developers that do all of them if I go.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-22 9:36
PHP sucks. Enjoy your meaningless, turbid life.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-22 9:45
if I start using other languages, they'll have a harder time looking for developers that do all of them if I go Exactly. It's called job security.
Name:
Anonymous2006-06-22 14:47
>>25
Part of the requisites of my job is that my work should be maintainable, thus I'm ordered to do it a certain way. Of course I know how to make it dependent on me, but that'd be wrong and kinda unprofessional after being explicitly asked not to.
Bringing /prog/ back to its people
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy