<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 99 Frameworks of Code Out There</title>
	<atom:link href="http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gravitonic.com/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there</link>
	<description>Life, technology, and other good things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:52:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: freelancer</title>
		<link>http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/comment-page-1#comment-622</link>
		<dc:creator>freelancer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:08:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gravitonic.com/n/?p=359#comment-622</guid>
		<description>Paul, Smarty is still widely used, and it indeed allows you to separate templates from php code (the thing my customers like the best). IMO it is ideal for small to middle projects.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul, Smarty is still widely used, and it indeed allows you to separate templates from php code (the thing my customers like the best). IMO it is ideal for small to middle projects.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul</title>
		<link>http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/comment-page-1#comment-621</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2007 14:41:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gravitonic.com/n/?p=359#comment-621</guid>
		<description>&quot;Smarty was actually revolutionary in its approach&quot; - Sorry!? What amounts to basically a language embedded in HTML? Well done, you reinvented PHP.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Smarty was actually revolutionary in its approach&#8221; &#8211; Sorry!? What amounts to basically a language embedded in HTML? Well done, you reinvented PHP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john</title>
		<link>http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/comment-page-1#comment-620</link>
		<dc:creator>john</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:29:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gravitonic.com/n/?p=359#comment-620</guid>
		<description>@Rick, I agree that the current surplus of frameworks is not maintainable in the long term, as I said natural selection will cull the weaker ones. The situation will stabilize over time.

I just think that competition is healthy as it drives projects to constantly improve. In the Ruby world, Rails is basically acting as a monopoly with no competing frameworks. Now its a really good framework there is no denying that, but it is the only one for Ruby (that I&#039;m aware of).

@Nate, just making the point that when DHH sat down to make Basecamp, did he start to write Rails from day one, or did he start writing an application (Basecamp) which he later extracted parts from to form a general framework (Rails)? In other words, I don&#039;t think he planned Rails from the offset, it just evolved naturally over time.

Is this a good approach to designer frameworks: design an application first, then extract the framework from that? Maybe, worked really well in the case of Rails.

For most of the current PHP frameworks I think the approach is different, in that they are designed as stand-alone frameworks from day one, with no particular application in mind. Is this approach more effective? I&#039;d be interested to know what other people think.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Rick, I agree that the current surplus of frameworks is not maintainable in the long term, as I said natural selection will cull the weaker ones. The situation will stabilize over time.</p>
<p>I just think that competition is healthy as it drives projects to constantly improve. In the Ruby world, Rails is basically acting as a monopoly with no competing frameworks. Now its a really good framework there is no denying that, but it is the only one for Ruby (that I&#8217;m aware of).</p>
<p>@Nate, just making the point that when DHH sat down to make Basecamp, did he start to write Rails from day one, or did he start writing an application (Basecamp) which he later extracted parts from to form a general framework (Rails)? In other words, I don&#8217;t think he planned Rails from the offset, it just evolved naturally over time.</p>
<p>Is this a good approach to designer frameworks: design an application first, then extract the framework from that? Maybe, worked really well in the case of Rails.</p>
<p>For most of the current PHP frameworks I think the approach is different, in that they are designed as stand-alone frameworks from day one, with no particular application in mind. Is this approach more effective? I&#8217;d be interested to know what other people think.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick</title>
		<link>http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/comment-page-1#comment-619</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:59:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gravitonic.com/n/?p=359#comment-619</guid>
		<description>@john: Having a lot of choices doesn&#039;t necessarily make for a lot of &quot;better&quot; choices.  Of the 50+ PHP frameworks you mentioned, I would guess that less than 10 of them are very stable/useful, and a smaller percentage of those will be maintained for long.

My problem with the current situation, and I&#039;m guessing Andrei&#039;s as well to some extent, is that our resources are being spread too thin.  Instead of improving and consolidating these ideas, we have a bunch of tiny groups racing to implement the same thing over and over.


</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@john: Having a lot of choices doesn&#8217;t necessarily make for a lot of &#8220;better&#8221; choices.  Of the 50+ PHP frameworks you mentioned, I would guess that less than 10 of them are very stable/useful, and a smaller percentage of those will be maintained for long.</p>
<p>My problem with the current situation, and I&#8217;m guessing Andrei&#8217;s as well to some extent, is that our resources are being spread too thin.  Instead of improving and consolidating these ideas, we have a bunch of tiny groups racing to implement the same thing over and over.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/comment-page-1#comment-618</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:31:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gravitonic.com/n/?p=359#comment-618</guid>
		<description>Rails was extracted from Basecamp.  Extraction is not equal to making something generalized; it&#039;s a byproduct of well-written code.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rails was extracted from Basecamp.  Extraction is not equal to making something generalized; it&#8217;s a byproduct of well-written code.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/comment-page-1#comment-617</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:00:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gravitonic.com/n/?p=359#comment-617</guid>
		<description>I think you make a good point Dagfinn, to me an existing framework is the same as someone else&#039;s legacy code, although they may have built it with generalisation in mind, it was still built for their own needs.

Lets not forget that Ruby on Rails was built for Basecamp, a single application, but I&#039;m guessing was generalised later on into the development.

The successful adoption of a framework by other developers is based on the same things that effect the successful adoption of legacy good, namely the quality of the documentation, the extendability of the design, the availability of the original designers to provide support and answer questions etc.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you make a good point Dagfinn, to me an existing framework is the same as someone else&#8217;s legacy code, although they may have built it with generalisation in mind, it was still built for their own needs.</p>
<p>Lets not forget that Ruby on Rails was built for Basecamp, a single application, but I&#8217;m guessing was generalised later on into the development.</p>
<p>The successful adoption of a framework by other developers is based on the same things that effect the successful adoption of legacy good, namely the quality of the documentation, the extendability of the design, the availability of the original designers to provide support and answer questions etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dagfinn ReiersÃ¸l</title>
		<link>http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/comment-page-1#comment-616</link>
		<dc:creator>Dagfinn ReiersÃ¸l</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Feb 2007 09:58:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gravitonic.com/n/?p=359#comment-616</guid>
		<description>Building your own framework may be an excellent idea if you&#039;re just catering to your own needs. You can make something lean; not having all the bells and whistles you don&#039;t need makes it much easier to maintain.

On the other hand, believing that that kind of framework will be useful for everybody else--or that it&#039;s easy to make it useful for everybody else--is madness.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Building your own framework may be an excellent idea if you&#8217;re just catering to your own needs. You can make something lean; not having all the bells and whistles you don&#8217;t need makes it much easier to maintain.</p>
<p>On the other hand, believing that that kind of framework will be useful for everybody else&#8211;or that it&#8217;s easy to make it useful for everybody else&#8211;is madness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/comment-page-1#comment-615</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Feb 2007 00:39:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gravitonic.com/n/?p=359#comment-615</guid>
		<description>Btw, I think what&#039;s needed here is education.

If the people starting new frameworks knew what it was *actually* like to develop a good general PHP project, they certainly wouldn&#039;t be doing because of ego.

The amount of sh*t that I take on a daily basis outweighs the thanks I get by orders of magnitude.

Every once in a while I get a &#039;thank you&#039; email out of the blue, but for every one of those, there are ten or more &#039;I-want-a-pony-ers&#039;.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Btw, I think what&#8217;s needed here is education.</p>
<p>If the people starting new frameworks knew what it was *actually* like to develop a good general PHP project, they certainly wouldn&#8217;t be doing because of ego.</p>
<p>The amount of sh*t that I take on a daily basis outweighs the thanks I get by orders of magnitude.</p>
<p>Every once in a while I get a &#8216;thank you&#8217; email out of the blue, but for every one of those, there are ten or more &#8216;I-want-a-pony-ers&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/comment-page-1#comment-614</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Feb 2007 00:26:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gravitonic.com/n/?p=359#comment-614</guid>
		<description>&quot;But I don&#039;t care if it&#039;s a pony, I want a *unicorn*!&quot;

I just love all these &#039;there&#039;s-no-framework-out-there-that-meets-my-needs&#039; comments.  It&#039;s easily some of the best entertainment I&#039;ve had in... well, the last 2 hours at least.

Newflash, people: at this stage of the game, there aren&#039;t too terribly many new ideas when it comes to building frameworks, and not to stomp on your ego or anything, but you probably don&#039;t have any of them.

Instead of whining about how no framework supports all your precious edge cases, start using one that covers *most* of what you *actually* need *most* of the time.

You&#039;ll not only save all that time you&#039;d have spent building your ego framework, but you&#039;ll also save all that time you&#039;d have spent whining.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;But I don&#8217;t care if it&#8217;s a pony, I want a *unicorn*!&#8221;</p>
<p>I just love all these &#8216;there&#8217;s-no-framework-out-there-that-meets-my-needs&#8217; comments.  It&#8217;s easily some of the best entertainment I&#8217;ve had in&#8230; well, the last 2 hours at least.</p>
<p>Newflash, people: at this stage of the game, there aren&#8217;t too terribly many new ideas when it comes to building frameworks, and not to stomp on your ego or anything, but you probably don&#8217;t have any of them.</p>
<p>Instead of whining about how no framework supports all your precious edge cases, start using one that covers *most* of what you *actually* need *most* of the time.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ll not only save all that time you&#8217;d have spent building your ego framework, but you&#8217;ll also save all that time you&#8217;d have spent whining.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://zmievski.org/2007/02/99-frameworks-of-code-out-there/comment-page-1#comment-613</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:18:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gravitonic.com/n/?p=359#comment-613</guid>
		<description>This is a fascinating debate, thanks for raising the post and provoking the debate, Andrei!

I&#039;m afraid I am also in the &quot;Not Invented Here/Re-inventing the Wheel&quot; camp on this one, as I am presently writing my own framework in PHP (for my own specific needs, I&#039;m not looking for glory here ;-).  When I am (constantly) asked by my friends about why I am going to all of this trouble, I refer them to the following URL:

http://www.design-ireland.net/alpha/controller/view_article.php?oid=00000000070

I actually had to write an article justifying my position, and even then I can also see the value of the counter-arguments on offer.

Ultimately, I think the current large sway of MVC frameworks in the PHP community is very healthy because:

1. It is making better PHP programmers.  According to the Java/.NET programmers, PHP developers can&#039;t crasp complex OO and design patterns.  Clearly this is not the case given the vibrant frameworks on offer...
2. In comparison to Ruby, which basically only has one framework, in PHP we have 50+, therefore a lot more choice.  Naturally not all of these will last, as natural selection will ensure that only the strongest survive into the medium term.

I agree though that there are better things to spend your free PHP development time on these days though, if you are thinking about the greater good of the community, like testing suites, build tools, continuous integration tools etc.

Just my 2cs.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a fascinating debate, thanks for raising the post and provoking the debate, Andrei!</p>
<p>I&#8217;m afraid I am also in the &#8220;Not Invented Here/Re-inventing the Wheel&#8221; camp on this one, as I am presently writing my own framework in PHP (for my own specific needs, I&#8217;m not looking for glory here <img src='http://zmievski.org/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> .  When I am (constantly) asked by my friends about why I am going to all of this trouble, I refer them to the following URL:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.design-ireland.net/alpha/controller/view_article.php?oid=00000000070" rel="nofollow">http://www.design-ireland.net/alpha/controller/view_article.php?oid=00000000070</a></p>
<p>I actually had to write an article justifying my position, and even then I can also see the value of the counter-arguments on offer.</p>
<p>Ultimately, I think the current large sway of MVC frameworks in the PHP community is very healthy because:</p>
<p>1. It is making better PHP programmers.  According to the Java/.NET programmers, PHP developers can&#8217;t crasp complex OO and design patterns.  Clearly this is not the case given the vibrant frameworks on offer&#8230;<br />
2. In comparison to Ruby, which basically only has one framework, in PHP we have 50+, therefore a lot more choice.  Naturally not all of these will last, as natural selection will ensure that only the strongest survive into the medium term.</p>
<p>I agree though that there are better things to spend your free PHP development time on these days though, if you are thinking about the greater good of the community, like testing suites, build tools, continuous integration tools etc.</p>
<p>Just my 2cs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
