Unstoppable Domains

RoR, Zend, CakePHP or just plain PHP?

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

kbweb

Established Member
Impact
4
I've only gotten complicated sites over the last half a year. I managed to learn a lot of PHP, MySQL as well as AJAX and javascript during that time.

Question:

Should I just keep using plain PHP, MySQL or is it worth it to learn a framework? If so which?

I know PHP pretty well so Zend or Cake may be good. But I've heard good things about Ruby on Rails.

Thanks
 
0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
GoDaddyGoDaddy
Do your own research and discover what could be best for your needs. If you don't mind Windows servers, the .NET Framework is pretty decent as well.

I'm personally a fan of RoR but I do not know it. *embarrassed smile*
 
0
•••
0
•••
What about writing a few of your own objects and methods to make coding easier?

I've tried both Ruby on Rails, and CakePHP, but you really have to learn how to use them like you've learned how to write PHP.

Learning PHP is hard enough, but there's another learning curve after PHP if you want to work with a framework.
 
0
•••
aceeca said:
I read somewhere that http://codeigniter.com/ is really better than Zend & CakePHP.

Better? Probably not.
Easier to pick up? Probably.

But that's just my opinion, it's how you see things.
 
0
•••
i find that coding all my PHP from scratch rather than using existing frameworks not only is more fun, but it also keeps my coding skills honed. plus you get bragging rights of saying you did the whole thing COMPLETELY from scratch =D
 
0
•••
I agree with nasaboy, programming his own framework is much more funnier and you do whatever you need to. Learning new frameworks require a lot of time, rather steep learning curve
 
0
•••
0
•••
I think RoR is very good and maybe is the most used of these that you said.

nasaboy007 said:
i find that coding all my PHP from scratch rather than using existing frameworks not only is more fun, but it also keeps my coding skills honed. plus you get bragging rights of saying you did the whole thing COMPLETELY from scratch =D
You are right man, just take care of don't reinvent the wheel...
 
0
•••
Faster doesn't mean better, definitely not functionality or security wise. Although that article is interesting...

All they really show you is procedual is one hell of a lot faster.

Dan
 
0
•••
Daniel said:
Faster doesn't mean better, definitely not functionality or security wise. Although that article is interesting...

All they really show you is procedual is one hell of a lot faster.

Dan

Agreed :D
 
0
•••
If the design and structure assumptions made by the framework designers happen to match your requirements, then a framework can be a great productivity tool.

Unfortunately, the assumptions tend to be very subtle. By the time you see them you are way down the learning curve.

We spent several months really getting into MODx only to find that our need to work with multiple domains was awkward to handle.
 
0
•••
I would go for plain PHP :)

All frameworks might be good. But yet I still think I want flexibility... and don't know why but I feel Plain PHP will give me more flexibility.
 
0
•••
0
•••
-Nick- said:
I would go for plain PHP :)

All frameworks might be good. But yet I still think I want flexibility... and don't know why but I feel Plain PHP will give me more flexibility.

I seems logical to me that frameworks will limit flexibility. I mean I've had some complicated projects which I think few have actually done, or those with vast experience have done. Half the time doing the site was spent on figuring out HOW to program it (Many times I googled "PHP ..."). :|

What if I needed to customize the framework? Is this easy to do?

Thanks everyone for your replies!
 
0
•••
With frameworks what you are searching is speed of development. If you want flexibility you will not go for a framework.
 
0
•••
Unstoppable Domains
Domain Recover
NameMaxi - Your Domain Has Buyers
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the pageโ€™s height.
Back