Code Comments
Programming Forum and web based access to our favorite programming groups.
Re: PHP on .NET DLROn Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 10:49:12AM +0300, Sancar Saran wrote: > Novel was fscked by M$. They are M$ puppy, they need M$ money to live thas why > they bedding with M$. One upon a time Novell king of the PC networking. Ho w >. Sad but true. We are not interested in how things should be, only on how thi ngs are. > > Also I don't remember anything big running with Mono. Yes. Porting the entire .NET would be an impossible task, and they will neve r succeed, but Silverlight is a subset, and would be clearly possible. > > So use MS tools which MS wants it. MS does not want anybody, anyone, anyth ing > other than MS in PC sector. MS does engage in unethical business practices. That is yet another thing in their favor. They will do anything to gain the marketshare, and so when the y are determined to the server market, I am worried. If they were a bunch pe ople who played nice, I mi ght be able to predict their plans, but with MS, we have no clue. So that's yet another advantage in favor Silverlight: the company behind it is a massi ve troll. > > My bet is "Because of Marketing". PHP on windows was not hot fusss. Even > suberbly support doesnt sound good. No. MS pulled Lada and Tomas a couple of days before the announcement of Zen d-MS alliance. I am betting that it was part of the Zend-MS deal. > M$ is not suberb tech company. M$ is suberb marketing company. Not anymore. Yes. MS has a long way to go. But if you look at their latest p roducts, it would seem MS has finally been able to afford top notch programm ers. Just look at their entire attitude: dropping VB, and moving to C. :-) P owershell is really brilli ant, and as Mike pointed out, it is insipred from Perl/Python, but to me it is 100% C. > > So I'm talking about, PHP was so easy to write programs. Those days > browserside was hot and I cannot use php on browser side. > > Javascript, Flash and other things was much complicated to me and my kind. If > PHP offers someting on browser side (like xajax and xaja projects) by > internally and some standardization for user input validation in PHP6 it was > overkill for that ruby on rocket and silverlighty 2000watt. Yes. Exactly. In that case, Silverlight is for you. Silverlight will allow y ou to write the browserside code ALSO in PHP. No more mucking around with Ja vascript. Write your entire APP in PHP. So, are you now going to join me in my campaign for PHP on .NE T? Again, thanks for the conversation.
Post Follow-up to this message
Re: PHP on .NET DLRHello, Just search for ironruby, and you will see how much free publicity PHP has a lready missed. There is something called as the fanatical developer, people who are eager to try things and post about them. .NET is a whole another wor ld, why shouldn't PHP be t here too? To me, it makes no sense. You are pointlessly muzzling the langua ge and the developers from exploring a brand new territory, and ultimately t his shortsighted decision taken now will be rued much later. http://www.internetnews.com/dev-new...cle.php/3641101 I think I have beaten around the bush enough though. My real point is that I feel--at least that's the impression I get from reading the above press rel ease about the MS-Zend Partnership--that MS pulled out from Phalanger at Zen d's request. So I guess, t here is absolutely no chance for PHP on .NET. My personal opionion is that this is going to turn out bad for _both_ PHP an d Zend. MS, to be frank, finally pulled a fast one on Zend. They agreed to s top working on Phalanger, and they just switched their focus to IronRuby. Ul timately MS lost nothing, but PHP suffered, and is going to lose the really large number of VB/VCS dev s would have come into contact with it, not to mention the countless enterpr ises who would now prefer something more cross-platform. If short sighted business decisions are what's going to determine a language 's roadmap, it is a really terrible situation indeed. Language--at least to a real programmer (tm)--is something very personal, and to be constrained li ke this due to some miopic decisions, really makes you feel frustrated. Thanks.
Post Follow-up to this message RE: PHP on .NET DLRK T Ligesh wrote: > definition "A > > Isn't that the very definition of 'screwing over'. if I > spend my entire life getting adept at something, and then the > company just drops it, they are screwing me over. And please, > the termininology isn't mine. I think the VB6 programmers > explicity said that MS had fcked them in the *ss. This is a > verbatim statement in one of the early usenet posts, and a > point of extreme controversy in the VB community. It is the definition for those whose world view is that they are at the center of the world and measure everything by how it affects them without accepting that life is life and others can and will do things that negativity affect others and they have a right to do so. And it's not exactly a mature world view either, and it's literally unhealthly. Better to take control of his own existence than to blame others for their situation. > You seem to be taking productivity very trivially. You seem to be putting words in my mouth. > Change of > enviroment is not an easy thing to cope with. Haven't you > gone through all the rebellion that VB6 folks had raised > against the new VB.NET? I watched it with the same head0shaking that this thread is generating from me. I was a VB6er who say that VB.NET was worth the effort. (though I've since moved on, for other reasons.) > Now I have the > ability to sympathize with other people's plight even though > it doesn't directly affect me. Now that is ironic given my comment above! > And now with Powershell, it just got worse. Come again? > I believe in building incredibly complex systems that can do > everthing. I really hate the cacaphony of a myriad small > systems all interacting haphazardly. Maybe you should read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar." Or study "Swarm Theory." Monolithic systems can't achieve the scalability and effectiveness of many small systems. > Powershell > doesn't have > > It HAS. If you want multiple command on the same line, you > use semi-colon. WRONG! I said "And it doesn't have those *INFERNAL* semi-colons." (emphasis added.) You gave me an example of INTELLIGENTLY-USED semi-colons, big difference. In Powershell, semi-colons are used for the special case when as part of deciding on code formatting a developer would not forget to include the semi-colon. In the normal case with C-based languages semi-colons are superfluous to understanding the logic and it's just something annoying that causes continuous syntax errors and a real drag on productivity. > Yeah. But there exists also a radically different approach > in the Desktop, which is also EQUALLY succesfull, and the > real reason why web is hot is that customer doesn't need to > download anything. The more you write, the more it is clear you have no real knowledge of web architecture. Before posting again on that topic, please at least read "Architecture of the World Wide Web, Volume One"[1]. The fact "they don't need to download anything" is far from being the only reason why the web has been so successful. As they say "It's the Architecture, stupid!" [2] :) > I think you should just give up. The Future is C. And for > good reasons. Programming shouldn't be descriptive. If anyone > wants descriptive languages, let them become an author and > write novels. Heh! I'd challenge you to a bet for 10 years from now, but as with most firmly-held ideologies you'll probably never acknowledge being wrong even with evidence surrounding you so the bet would be futile. > But it is already there. Phalanger is already there. > The only thing is needed: Zend has to get MS adopt it. If > Phalanger didnt' exist, I wouldn't bother. I have many many > times repeated that the only reason why my request cannot be > deemed unreasonable is that Phalanger already exists in a > completed state, and I am currently using it to build > applications, but the project looks abandoned, and nobody is > answering any of my queries. And I've repeatedly said "Quit moaning about it and run with it." If you can't take action on it, then it is not important enough so get over it. > If short sighted business decisions are what's going to > determine a language's roadmap, it is a really terrible > situation indeed. Language--at least to a real programmer > (tm)--is something very personal, and to be constrained like > this due to some miopic decisions, really makes you feel frustrated. Your comments come across as that you are the only one qualified to make business decisions. That is rather condescending, isn't it? > The code is there. The only thing lacking is the official > stamp. Both from the PHP community and from MS. Tomas has > done an outstanding piece of work, but it got scuttled by MS. > Why do I have to repeat this again and again. the code is > already there. If it didn't, I am merely trying count the > clouds. But that's not so. Microsoft pays atttention to developer interest. Show them interest (in the form of code, not petitions, MS don't respect petitions [3]) > MS financially supported Tomas and Lada when they were > working on phalanger. I don't think MS is the culprit here. > There is some reason why MS has dropped PHP, I am trying to > figure that out. Because evidently few people (besides you) care about it. > I am talking about PHP on .NET, which is a server side > technology. Silverlight is a simple browser frontend for the > backend web application, similar to Ajax. PHP on .NET has no > diswithblogs.net/sbellware/archive/2005/03/09/25880.aspx[/url] [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Categ...anguage s
Post Follow-up to this message Re: PHP on .NET DLROn Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 06:18:16PM -0400, Mike Schinkel wrote: > > It is the definition for those whose world view is that they are at the > center of the world and measure everything by how it affects them without > accepting that life is life and others can and will do things that > negativity affect others and they have a right to do so. And it's not > exactly a mature world view either, and it's literally unhealthly. Better to > take control of his own existence than to blame others for their situation.[/color ] They WERE trying to take control of their situation, by trying to get MS rec ognize the seriousness of the their problem. And well, it has worked, at lea st to a certain extent. MS is already touting VBx or dynamic VB, and it did make MS take a bit more ef fort in writing softwares to ease the migration to VB.NET, and also take oth er actions to appease the community. The thing is, when you are working on a framework, you ARE dependent on it. If there is a problem, you have to take it with the vendor. Your idea is tha t, everytime anything goes wrong, you will just put on your handyman hat and start poking around creat ing your own version of it. Hey, we got other stuff to do. If this was the c ase, I will just write my own language and not use anything by others. As de velopers, we ARE fully dependent on the platform vendors, and the only way w e can affect a change in th e platform itself is by complaining, or maybe switching to a competitive pla tform. Your ideas are simply not practical. I have 3 choices: 1) Move to a competing platform 2) Write my own dynamic language. 3) Complain to the platform vendor to affect the change. Of the three, at this point, the last is the only feasible option for me. If this was 1965, I can maybe defect and start my own language. > > > You seem to be putting words in my mouth. > > > I watched it with the same head0shaking that this thread is generating fro m > me. I was a VB6er who say that VB.NET was worth the effort. (though I've > since moved on, for other reasons.) > Worth the effort for what? We all have other things in life, other than re-l earn everything every other day. Our job is not to learn languages, but rath er to deliver useful products, and we simply do not have the time or effort to focus on the languages itself. We take it for granted, so that we can focus on our application. If the language changes suddenly, it leads to loss of millions of dollars and m arket share. I know a company in my field, that has nearly gone bankrupt, be cause they tried to complet ely transition to .NET, and another competitor overtook them using PHP. Thes e are all real world issues here, and lots of money and people's lives invol ved. You are talking in terms of an individual developer fooling around with technologies. > > Now that is ironic given my comment above! > > > Come again? Powershell is meant to replace VBscript. The latter is fundamentally differe nt from the former. MS is making everyone learn everything afresh. > > > Maybe you should read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar." Or study "Swarm > Theory." Monolithic systems can't achieve the scalability and > effectiveness of many small systems. Yeah, tell that to GNU Hurd people, who are still trying to create a microke rnel based operating system, and failing miserably. If done well, monolithic systems are better. The problem is that individuals are incapable of handli ng the kind of complexity, and then start touting simplicity as an advantage. Cathedral and the Bazaar? Does anybody quote it anymore these days? > > WRONG! I said "And it doesn't have those *INFERNAL* semi-colons." > (emphasis added.) You gave me an example of INTELLIGENTLY-USED semi-colon s, > big difference. In Powershell, semi-colons are used for the special case > when as part of deciding on code formatting a developer would not forget t o > include the semi-colon. In the normal case with C-based languages > semi-colons are superfluous to understanding the logic and it's just > something annoying that causes continuous syntax errors and a real drag on > productivity. For multiple commands, you have to use semi-colon, but anyway the point is m oot. For all practical purposes, Powershell script (if it is written by me) looks like C. > > > The more you write, the more it is clear you have no real knowledge of web > architecture. Before posting again on that topic, please at least read > "Architecture of the World Wide Web, Volume One"[1]. The fact "they don't > need to download anything" is far from being the only reason why the web h as > been so successful. As they say "It's the Architecture, stupid!" [2] :) To me, web is a means to deliver services to the client, and the only advant age I have seen in practice is that the lack of a specific client. Now, you can indulge yourself in a lot of jargon to make it appear something more tha n it is, but I don't think you will convince me. > > > Heh! I'd challenge you to a bet for 10 years from now, but as with most > firmly-held ideologies you'll probably never acknowledge being wrong even > with evidence surrounding you so the bet would be futile. Please. Even your favorite language Powershell is exactly like C. Ok, it doe sn't REQUIRE semi-colon, but it works fine with it too. And you will NEED it , if you want to put multiple commands on a line, which obviously you will a lways need at some point. > > And I've repeatedly said "Quit moaning about it and run with it." If you > can't take action on it, then it is not important enough so get over it. I am an application vendor. I write applications. I cannot create a platform on an operating system in which I have no experience. That's simply not pos sible. As with the VB devs, all I can do here, is bring the situation to the attention of the platform vendors. > > > Your comments come across as that you are the only one qualified to make > business decisions. That is rather condescending, isn't it? The language suffers, there is no doubt about it. And I have explicitly stat ed the reasons why _I feel_ it may not be good for Zend either, and even the n, I have qualified all my statements by clearly saying that it is my opinio n. I have not made any pro nouncements which I had expected to be taken as literal truth merely because I said it. Zend is intimately tied to PHP, and I have no problem with them making money, as it actually benefits the language. And again, as I have said, if Ruby didn't exist, it wouldn't really matter. But now it is evident that Zend's decision has clearly backfired, since Ruby is now again glowing with all the attention, merely because PHP purposefull y decided to not join the .NET/sliverlight frenzy. > > Microsoft pays atttention to developer interest. Show them interest (in th e > form of code, not petitions, MS don't respect petitions [3]) MS cares about Developer interest in writing programs WITH phalanger, not wr iting phalanger. There was no Ruby Code at all, yet, MS managed to get it do ne in a couple of months. You are still repeating an argument that I had con sistently disproved. > So you think Microsoft is unique in unethical behaviour? If yes you > clearly haven't followed any of the other Fortune 1000... > > Anyway, nature abhors a vacuum, there will be valid competition. Of course, MS alone is not run by Evil spacemen from Mars. They all are the same monkey evolved human species, and they all show the same characteristic s. But you can contrast them to google, which at least in theory has a 'don' t be evil' policy. > > > > So I guess SQL is not a language? Nor Assembly? Nor Lisp? And I guess > Wikipedia [4] got it all wrong? > > Jeesh, all these years I've just been deluded! You know, I'm learning so > much from you, things the entire rest of the world must just have wrong. > What a revelation! <sic> Lisp? Lisp has if/then. I have done a lot of elisp for emacs, and it is a pr oper language. I have no experience with SQL, but if the DB supports stored procedures, then it also should support if/then. Assembly has if/then/go-to, and that is how they implement the while/for loo ps. RSS is not a language. And is still not present in the list you have sup plied. Your hyperBolic exclamations are pointless. lisp/sql--with stored pro cedures--/assembly are rea l languages. RSS is not. > > "Great programmers" focus on deriving simplicity from complexity, not > perpetuating complexity. If it helps your self-esteem to think that you c an > are better than "some idiot", more power to you, but don't hoist this > ideology on the rest of the world. "Deriving simplicity from complexity?" Wht does that mean? > > > There you go again with the false dichotomies. That was a genuine question. I need a dynamic C like language to build appli cations on windows, and I still haven't found it. > > Works for you, but not necessarily for others. Some of my ideas will work for others, though obviusly not everything. > > > "flagrant disregard for the wellness of the programmer?" Can you please > elaborate?!?!? Many people have requested Python to implement the variable-in-string, but n obody listens. They have pre-conceived notions of how a language should be, and any request for a feature that can ease development is met with a lot of hostile homily about what a language should be. Again, I have never coded in python, I just went throu gh some of the emails. > > Once again you expose your ignorance. Python requires self because it > doesn't give special status to method in classes; any method can be a > function or can be a method of a class, and this can change dynamically. > These are called "callables"; google it. Python could have implemented har d > to use special cases that eliminate flexibility and easily lead to bugs in > Here, I can conceded to you. I have not coded in python. I come from a C/c++ background, and while making a decision to choose between PHP5 or python fo r my web platform, I decided on PHP5, basically owing the speed, the C style syntax, and yes, it had f ull OO. So I can agree that it might be a specific design decision, but cons idering that none of the other languages have it, I am still not really conv inced that this particular decision is a wise one. > > Looks like what I feared; you DO see a conspiracy around every corner. > Debate it only productive when it is done rationally, so it appears these > debates are just a waste of time. > Well. You never provided me with any sane or coherent alternate explanation. Since I can't find any simple answers, I have to now take the investigation to the next level.
Post Follow-up to this message RE: PHP on .NET DLRSigh. I said I wouldn't post again on this topic, but... K T Ligesh wrote: > They WERE trying to take control of their situation, by > trying to get MS recognize the seriousness of the their > problem. And well, it has worked, at least to a certain > extent. MS is already touting VBx or dynamic VB, and it did > make MS take a bit more effort in writing softwares to ease > the migration to VB.NET, and also take other actions to > appease the community. > > The thing is, when you are working on a framework, you ARE > dependent on it. If there is a problem, you have to take it > with the vendor. Your idea is that, everytime anything goes > wrong, you will just put on your handyman hat and start > poking around creating your own version of it. Hey, we got > other stuff to do. If this was the case, I will just write my > own language and not use anything by others. As developers, > we ARE fully dependent on the platform vendors, and the only > way we can affect a change in the platform itself is by > complaining, or maybe switching to a competitive platform. > Your ideas are simply not practical. > > I have 3 choices: > 1) Move to a competing platform > 2) Write my own dynamic language. > 3) Complain to the platform vendor to affect the change. > > Of the three, at this point, the last is the only feasible > option for me. If this was 1965, I can maybe defect and start > my own language. > > ========= > > Worth the effort for what? We all have other things in life, > other than re-learn everything every other day. Our job is > not to learn languages, but rather to deliver useful > products, and we simply do not have the time or effort to > focus on the languages itself. We take it for granted, so > that we can focus on our application. If the language changes > suddenly, it leads to loss of millions of dollars and market > share. I know a company in my field, that has nearly gone > bankrupt, because they tried to completely transition to > .NET, and another competitor overtook them using PHP. These > are all real world issues here, and lots of money and > people's lives involved. You are talking in terms of an > individual developer fooling around with technologies. Point is, life throws you curve balls all the time. Quit whining and learn how to deal with it. Nobody likes a complainer. > Powershell is meant to replace VBscript. The latter is > fundamentally different from the former. MS is making > everyone learn everything afresh. God I love you with your passive voice and "is to meant" comments. Wikipedia calls them "weasel words." [1] :) > Yeah, tell that to GNU Hurd people, who are still trying to > create a microkernel based operating system, and failing > miserably. If done well, monolithic systems are better. The > problem is that individuals are incapable of handling the > kind of complexity, and then start touting simplicity as an advantage. There is truth in both aspects, i.e. there is some value in monolithic and some value in modular. The difference is that I acknowledge both. :) BTW, funny that you use the term "monolithic"; see: [2] > Cathedral and the Bazaar? Does anybody quote it anymore these days? I just did. > For multiple commands, you have to use semi-colon, but > anyway the point is moot. For all practical purposes, > Powershell script (if it is written by me) looks like C. If you say so, I guess it must be true regardless of anyone else's opinion. '-) > To me, web is a means to deliver services to the client, and > the only advantage I have seen in practice is that the lack > of a specific client. Now, you can indulge yourself in a lot > of jargon to make it appear something more than it is, but I > don't think you will convince me. That's what I like, someone with an open mind who realizes that their own experiences are by a flyspec in the universe of all combined experience. ;-) > > Please. Even your favorite language Powershell is exactly > like C. Favorite language? I like aspects of it. EXACTLY like C? No, you "please." > Ok, it doesn't REQUIRE semi-colon, but it works fine > with it too. And you will NEED it, if you want to put > multiple commands on a line, which obviously you will always > need at some point. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them think, can you? As I've already explained, the existence of semi-colons in a language does not make it C. Whether you choose to recognize it is another matter entirely. BTW, here's a C# advocate [3] talking about what's nice about VB.NET. > I am an application vendor. I write applications. I cannot > create a platform on an operating system in which I have no > experience. That's simply not possible. It is possible, you just choose not to. But don't make your choice everyone else's problem. > determine a > > The language suffers, there is no doubt about it. And I have > explicitly stated the reasons why _I feel_ it may not be good > for Zend either, and even then, I have qualified all my > statements by clearly saying that it is my opinion. Zend are big boys, I think they can take care of themselves. And in my world I find it less offensive when people literally prefix phrases like "short sighted business decisions" with something like "from my perspective it appears these are." But maybe it is just me. > I have not made any pronouncements which I had expected > to be taken as literal truth merely because I said it. You've made tons of pronouncements here, about business decisions and C language and monolithic complexity being superior et. al. Are we now just to assume that even though you said them you see no truth in your own statements? I'm. > And again, as I have said, if Ruby didn't exist, it wouldn't > really matter. But now it is evident that Zend's decision has > clearly backfired, since Ruby is now again glowing with all > the attention, merely because PHP purposefully decided to not > join the .NET/sliverlight frenzy. So Ruby is the one to demonize? I guess everyone has to have an enemy. Heck, Java was Ruby's enemy. Looks like PHP is becoming collateral damage! LOL. :) BTW, what Zend decision backfired? Is this still your conspiracy theory? Heck, if you want to talk conspiracy theories, let's talk 9/11! > > MS cares about Developer interest in writing programs WITH > phalanger, not writing phalanger. There was no Ruby Code at > all, yet, MS managed to get it done in a couple of months. > You are still repeating an argument that I had consistently disproved. So you now know what the non-existent collective consciousness of Microsoft prefers? Please. And just exactly how have you "disproved" this argument? > Of course, MS alone is not run by Evil spacemen from Mars. > They all are the same monkey evolved human species, and they > all show the same characteristics. But you can contrast them > to google, which at least in theory has a 'don't be evil' policy. Google vs. Microsoft and their (don't) be evil policy? LOL!!!! See [4]. Over time, people become what they most despise [5]. Google already has more power than MS ever did, and we will all be lamenting that reality soon enough. > I have no experience with > SQL, but if the DB supports stored procedures, then it also > should support if/then. How can you have no experience with something yet claim you know enough to make blanket pronunciations like you do? > Assembly has if/then/go-to, and that is how they implement > the while/for loops. > > RSS is not a language. And is still not present in the list > you have supplied. lisp/sql--with stored procedures--/assembly are > real languages. RSS is not. Okay, I guess RSS is not a language and none of the experiences of history related to RSS can ever apply to languages with if/then. At least it is so in K T Ligesh's world. > Your hyperBolic exclamations are > pointless. HyperBolic exclamations? And just exactly how did I exaggerate? > "Deriving simplicity from complexity?" Wht does that mean? It mean refactoring to derive at simplicity rather than to strive for maintaining complexity. > > Some of my ideas will work for others, though obviusly not > everything. I haven't used the words "all", "every", "competely" etc. On the contrary, I recognize that everything is gray. OTOH, you have made a like of black and white pronouncements, and I am highly allergic to absolutes (which is why I have continued this debate.) > > Many people have requested Python to implement the > variable-in-string, but nobody listens. They have > pre-conceived notions of how a language should be, and any > request for a feature that can ease development is met with a > lot of hostile homily about what a language should be. Just because somebody doesn't implement a pet feature doesn't mean they are showing "flagrant disregard for the wellness of the programmer?" They is significant value to having concept integrity in most anything, and because they choose to maintain their conceptual integrity doesn't give you license to demonize them for it. Frankly I'm learning to like the dollar sign prefixed variables in PHP and Powershell, but there are good reasons for Python not including them. The fact that you willfully ignore that is disrespectful. Every programming language I've ever used has has aspects that I liked and others I disliked. The only way to get my perfect language would be to design it myself, but how useful would that be with likely nobody else using it? If your yardstick for "flagrant disregard for the wellness of the programmer" is that you can't have your pet feature then every programming language is destined for the pits of hell because no language supports the pet features of everyone except maybe those languages that have only one user. > Again, I have never coded in python, I just went through > some of the emails. Then you really don't seem qualified to make such harsh statements? There are lots of things I haven't done with PHP and I refrain from sitting in judgement of PHP because of it. And for those things I do know of PHP such as its random and inconsistent approach to function naming and parameter order I find infuriating, but I'm not claiming that Rasmus or the community is inherently evil. I recognize reality and am going about my business. > Here, I can conceded to you. I have not coded in python. I > come from a C/c++ background, and while making a decision to > choose between PHP5 or python for my web platform, I decided > on PHP5, basically owing the speed, the C style syntax, and > yes, it had full OO. So I can agree that it might be a > specific design decision, but considering that none of the > other languages have it, I am still not really convinced that > this particular decision is a wise one. Wow. You didn't acknowledge. I need to grant you that. None of the other languages choose to use self because none of them have the same architecture of Python? Do I love everything about Python? No, but I do find many of its concepts compelling. May I request this of you? Develop an app in Python and another in Ruby before making pronouncements against them. Follow the Pragamtic Programmer's lead [6]: "Learn at least one new [programming] language every year. Different languages solve the same problems in different ways. By learning several different approaches, you can help broaden your thinking and avoid getting stuck in a rut." > Well. You never provided me with any sane or coherent > alternate explanation. I did give sane and coherent alternate explanations, you just choose to ignore that I did. The explanations are that MS is filled with managers who don't share a common consciousness and that they make a decision on priorities as part of their job which are not the ones that you would have preferred the chose. Simple as that, nothing more. > Since I can't find any simple answers, > I have to now take the investigation to the next level. Knock yourself out. -- -Mike Schinkel http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/ http://www.welldesignedurls.org http://atlanta-web.org - http://t.oolicio.us [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_words [2] http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blog/ m...elayers / [3] http://weblogs.asp.net/jdennany/arc.../18/244136.aspx [4] http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blog/is...omingamonopoly/ [5] http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blog/ b...despi se/ [6] http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/loty/
Post Follow-up to this message RE: PHP on .NET DLRThe work Zend and Microsoft do together in order to improve PHP on the Windows platform is in no way related to Phalanger and it will definitely not prevent Microsoft from investing in this direction if they choose to. In that interview when I say "We", I mean Zend. Yes, I am not thrilled about investing in a fork of PHP (which Phalanger would be) but there's absolutely nothing (in the spirit of open-source) which would prevent you or Microsoft from making it happen. In fact, as you feel so passionate about doing this why doesn't lxlabs (or you personally) invest in making it happen? It takes passionate people to build this stuff and you've definitely got enough of it :) Andi > -----Original Message----- > From: K T Ligesh [mailto:ligesh@lxlabs.com] > Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 1:20 PM > To: Rasmus Lerdorf > Cc: php-evangelism@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: PHP on .NET DLR >=20 >=20 > Hello, >=20 > Just search for ironruby, and you will see how much free publicity PHP > has already missed. There is something called as the fanatical > developer, people who are eager to try things and post about them. .NET > is a whole another world, why shouldn't PHP be there too? To me, it > makes no sense. You are pointlessly muzzling the language and the > developers from exploring a brand new territory, and ultimately this > shortsighted decision taken now will be rued much later. >=20 > http://www.internetnews.com/dev-new...cle.php/3641101 >=20 > I think I have beaten around the bush enough though. My real point is > that I feel--at least that's the impression I get from reading the > above press release about the MS-Zend Partnership--that MS pulled out > from Phalanger at Zend's request. So I guess, there is absolutely no > chance for PHP on .NET. >=20 > My personal opionion is that this is going to turn out bad for _both_ > PHP and Zend. MS, to be frank, finally pulled a fast one on Zend. They > agreed to stop working on Phalanger, and they just switched their focus > to IronRuby. Ultimately MS lost nothing, but PHP suffered, and is going > to lose the really large number of VB/VCS devs would have come into > contact with it, not to mention the countless enterprises who would now > prefer something more cross-platform. >=20 >=20 > If short sighted business decisions are what's going to determine a > language's roadmap, it is a really terrible situation indeed. Language- > -at least to a real programmer (tm)--is something very personal, and to > be constrained like this due to some miopic decisions, really makes you > feel frustrated. >=20 > Thanks. >=20 >=20 >=20
Post Follow-up to this message Re: PHP on .NET DLROn Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 12:21:53AM -0400, Mike Schinkel wrote: > Sigh. I said I wouldn't post again on this topic, but... That's ok. We haven't deteriorated to pure flame war yet. Yes, a lot of nons ense, but similar to 18th century speculative scientific works, I am sure th at there might 1-2 gems in between. :-) > > Point is, life throws you curve balls all the time. Quit whining and learn > how to deal with it. Nobody likes a complainer. Earlier I used to take the software and rewrite it to suit my needs. I had r ewritten fvwm, lynx, elinks, vim, mutt, rdesktop etc to make them bend to my narrow requirements. That was when I didn't have to cater alone to more tha n 500 customers, or handle 100 emails per day. Now, what I do is: whine, complain and _sponsor_. Yes, i nstead of patching elinks, sharpe, and xming, I just decided to donate an am ount to get what I wanted. I have passed that "I can fix everything stage". It was fun back then, but n ow my priority is my own applcations. Yes, whining IS the way to go here, be cause it is something that is competely out of my own domain. > > > God I love you with your passive voice and "is to meant" comments. > Wikipedia calls them "weasel words." [1] :) Powershell IS the replacement to VBscript. Isn't that so? > > > There is truth in both aspects, i.e. there is some value in monolithic and > some value in modular. The difference is that I acknowledge both. :) > > BTW, funny that you use the term "monolithic"; see: [2] You yourself has stated that getting drupal, wordpress to work together is i mpossible. That's exactly the problem. Many simple small stuffs are, so long as they are all indendent, but they generate more Entropy the instant you try to get them to wor k together. > > > I just did. > > > If you say so, I guess it must be true regardless of anyone else's opinion . > '-) It has braces exactly like C, semi-colon (optional). Is that pretty much how C is. Again, it looks like C to me. > > That's what I like, someone with an open mind who realizes that their own > experiences are by a flyspec in the universe of all combined experience. ;-)[/colo r] Isn't client side computing the ideal? I mean, aren't you letting all the 1 billion PCs sit idle, while your single server takes all the load? Wouldn't the ideal situation be where the client did all the heavy work, and the serv er just stored the data? A rchitecture wise, I would say desktop is better. The only issue is: you have to download/install a software, which is something that people balk from. You should understand that DESPITE this severe drawback--that client has to download softwares--Destop is a thriving business. Despite Google's horde of cash, where is the Web equivalent of Word? Will we ever see a web alternati ve to Office? Is it even t heortically possible? Maybe with Silverlight, but not if we stick with the c urrent idea of printing crappy HTML. HTML is not programming. IN fact, in my own software, I have strict policy not to use separate CSS files too. They are meant for a web develop ers to cobble together some sites fast. Not at all meant for designing appli cations. Web was NEVER meant for applications. Anyway, it is changing. Mozi lla was touting a similar controls that can be manipulated via javascript. > > > Favorite language? I like aspects of it. > EXACTLY like C? No, you "please." It has semi-colon, has full braces. Or Maybe it is just that I have a tenden cy to feel that everything looks like C. > > > You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them think, can you? As > I've already explained, the existence of semi-colons in a language does no t > make it C. Whether you choose to recognize it is another matter entirely. And braces. Don't forget the braces. > > It is possible, you just choose not to. But don't make your choice everyon e > else's problem. I wrote this: http://demo.lxadmin.com:7778 this http://demo.hypervm.com:8888 and h ttp://client.lxlabs.com .Alone. They are fully distributed, cross platform, and are not prototypes and large. They are pure php, and no frameworks or li braries involved. An d I answer more than 100 messages per day here: http://forum.lxlabs.com . I am simply not capable of taking on a completely different project in a compl etely different domain. > > Zend are big boys, I think they can take care of themselves. And in my > world I find it less offensive when people literally prefix phrases like > "short sighted business decisions" with something like "from my perspectiv e > it appears these are." But maybe it is just me. Yes. Zend is big, which is one of the reasons why I had stuck with PHP. But I need PHP on .NET, or at least some guarantee that it will be there before all the VB devs gets a chance to start churning out software in Silverlight. I do not know whether Sil verlight will be big or not, but I don't want to miss out on it. > > > You've made tons of pronouncements here, about business decisions and C > language and monolithic complexity being superior et. al. Are we now just to > assume that even though you said them you see no truth in your own > statements? I'm
Post Follow-up to this message Re: PHP on .NET DLR> Wow. You didn't acknowledge. I need to grant you that. > > None of the other languages choose to use self because none of them have t he > same architecture of Python? Do I love everything about Python? No, but I > do find many of its concepts compelling. > > May I request this of you? Develop an app in Python and another in Ruby > before making pronouncements against them. Follow the Pragamtic > Programmer's lead [6]: > > "Learn at least one new [programming] language every year. > Different languages solve the same problems in different ways. > By learning several different approaches, you can help broaden > your thinking and avoid getting stuck in a rut." > You can also broaden your thinking by working on different platforms. I lear ned quite a lot of new things when I ported my software to windows, and for me, cross-platform learning leads more practical benefits, rather than cross -language learning. Yes, I clearly understand what you have said. I have gone through Ruby/Python sourc ecode in search of ideas I can apply to my PHP project, but getting deeper i nto either of them will harm my productivity. I have clinical OCD, and on to p of that I am only capabl e of doing one single thing at a time. So Dabbling in a field is something m y brain is incapable of ever engaging in. If I do something I do it all my w aking hours. Currently, I am building graphical interfaces in PHP for managi ng operating systems , and that's the only thing I am capable of doing for a long time.
Post Follow-up to this message Re: PHP on .NET DLRThanks for the clarification. All I hope is that PHP will be there with all the other languages in the DLR. On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 09:43:25PM -0700, Andi Gutmans wrote: > The work Zend and Microsoft do together in order to improve PHP on the > Windows platform is in no way related to Phalanger and it will > definitely not prevent Microsoft from investing in this direction if > they choose to. In that interview when I say "We", I mean Zend. Yes, I > am not thrilled about investing in a fork of PHP (which Phalanger would > be) but there's absolutely nothing (in the spirit of open-source) which > would prevent you or Microsoft from making it happen. > > In fact, as you feel so passionate about doing this why doesn't lxlabs > (or you personally) invest in making it happen? It takes passionate > people to build this stuff and you've definitely got enough of it :) > I haven't yet gained an instintive feel of the windows platform, and it will take a long time. Lxlabs is really small. The entire software development a nd all the articles on the website are handled by me.
Post Follow-up to this message RE: PHP on .NET DLRAndi Gutmans wrote: > The work Zend and Microsoft do together in order to improve > PHP on the Windows platform is in no way related to Phalanger > and it will definitely not prevent Microsoft from investing > in this direction if they choose to. In that interview when I > say "We", I mean Zend. Yes, I am not thrilled about investing > in a fork of PHP (which Phalanger would > be) but there's absolutely nothing (in the spirit of > open-source) which would prevent you or Microsoft from making > it happen. Thanks for weighing in. As I expected, no consipiracy, just doing business as you best know how. Curious; would it be possible for Zend to work with MS such that is would not be a fork? IOW, creating an architecture that allowed .NET underneath but where it is still the "official" PHP? Just a thought... -- -Mike Schinkel http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/ http://www.welldesignedurls.org http://atlanta-web.org - http://t.oolicio.us
Post Follow-up to this message
Sponsored Links
Show a Printable Version
Email This Page to Someone!
Receive updates to this thread
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000-2006 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
