PHP perhaps the ugliest language ever

[lilelvis2000]

I'm looking to two OpenSource solutions for a client and as a potential business opportunity for myself - beats building pipelined functions in PL/SQL all day. They both use PHP!

It must be the ugliest language I have every seen. I think I might recommend to my client that they spend £10,000 on M$ stuff instead so I can use VB and keep my hair.

[d000hg]

I'm looking to two OpenSource solutions for a client and as a potential business opportunity for myself - beats building pipelined functions in PL/SQL all day. They both use PHP!

It must be the ugliest language I have every seen. I think I might recommend to my client that they spend £10,000 on M$ stuff instead so I can use VB and keep my hair.

You lost any credibility when you mentioned VB. Reputation of PHP aside, I do agree code written in it strikes me as ugly. I have the same opinion of T-SQL... I actually quite like PL/SQL but hate languages where I have to name variables #x or $y

[Stan.goodvibes]

Its all in the indenting

[NickFitz]

I'm looking to two OpenSource solutions for a client and as a potential business opportunity for myself - beats building pipelined functions in PL/SQL all day. They both use PHP!

It must be the ugliest language I have every seen. I think I might recommend to my client that they spend £10,000 on M$ stuff instead so I can use VB and keep my hair.

You appear to be missing the distinction between a language and the libraries commonly used by applications written in said language.

This is (apparently) an easy mistake to make - many people think that the .NET libraries are part of C#, or don't understand that a COM component used via VB isn't actually part of VB - it's a COM component and can be used via any language that supports COM, COM being of course an aspect of the way that Windows is structured.

And of course some people think that things outside of java.lang (like java.io or java.util) are part of the Java language, as opposed to being parts of a Java system's libraries, despite the rather obvious clue in the package's name.

PHP is a programming language that has a C-style syntax. In the core language there are constructs (such as the . operator for string concatenation) that reflect the fact that PHP has certain core datatypes and operators dealing therewith that aren't present in C (C doesn't have strings as a native datatype). There are also constructs relating to the fact that, as a dynamic late-bound language, it has certain aspects that are not found when programming in a static early-bound language, such as dealing with pass-by-value versus pass-by-reference - although you should understand that if you work with VB.

Actually, I'm not certain whether, when you refer to VB, you mean VB or VB.NET. Either way, I would suggest that steering your client to a technology you personally feel comfortable with isn't a good business strategy - the client's needs should take priority, and there really can't be a good business case for them to spend thousands of quid meeting your requirements, when you should be meeting theirs.

PHP and its associated libraries are very far from being God's gift to the world of application development. But you can't seriously suggest that VB(+/-.NET) is any better. VB(+/-.NET) is one of the most syntactically poor languages to still have any traction in the marketplace. What traction it has is entirely dependent on legacy code, or the existence of permy legacy coders within IT departments. For any new application VB Classic (is that what they call it now?) is the wrong solution; and although Microsoft won't tell you this, for a .NET solution, VB.NET is also the wrong solution. VB.NET is (within Microsoft) very much regarded as the rod they made for their own backs. As soon as they can ditch it without losing face, they will. (Although it'll be couched in terms of "providing continuing support for existing products until the announced EOL date" because MS don't like to say "dead".)

Whatever you do, don't fsck your clients over by getting them to buy into dead technologies just so you can stay in your comfort zone. It means you'll never grow, and they can potentially give you grief down the line for selling them antiquated rubbish.

I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but just get real. If you came to me saying a £10,000-initial-investment VB solution (for any value of VB) was the preferred solution when a negligible-initial-investment PHP solution was to hand, I'd have you chucked out of the door - and I'd tell the chucker-outers to make sure you landed on something sharp.

Things change. My assembly language skills from the Eighties have no commercial value to me now. My PHP skills do, and they are informed by my experience as an assembly language programmer, and indeed by my experience in every single language I've ever used. Programming isn't about languages and libraries. It's about programming.

The technology moves on. Sometimes you don't like where it moves to. Suck it up; follow the money.

Don't frighten the money away, and definitely don't suggest that they spend the money on Microsoft rubbish when they could spend it on you, if you can be bothered to learn some new skills.

Oh, and before you give them to your clients, make sure you know those libraries inside out (the language is easy). Believe me, clients have a feeling of dull resignation when problems arise; but they love it when they get in touch and you can say straight away that you think you know exactly how and why it might have happened, even if it turns out to be something else entirely

[Spacecadet]

Moderating some harsh comments about VB programmers

Thanks dude

[Moscow Mule]

<lots of snip>

Crikey Nick, have you developed a "Denny" gene overnight?

[tay]

You appear to be missing the distinction between a language and the libraries commonly used by applications written in said language.

This is (apparently) an easy mistake to make - many people think that the .NET libraries are part of C#, or don't understand that a COM component used via VB isn't actually part of VB - it's a COM component and can be used via any language that supports COM, COM being of course an aspect of the way that Windows is structured.

And of course some people think that things outside of java.lang (like java.io or java.util) are part of the Java language, as opposed to being parts of a Java system's libraries, despite the rather obvious clue in the package's name.

PHP is a programming language that has a C-style syntax. In the core language there are constructs (such as the . operator for string concatenation) that reflect the fact that PHP has certain core datatypes and operators dealing therewith that aren't present in C (C doesn't have strings as a native datatype). There are also constructs relating to the fact that, as a dynamic late-bound language, it has certain aspects that are not found when programming in a static early-bound language, such as dealing with pass-by-value versus pass-by-reference - although you should understand that if you work with VB.

Actually, I'm not certain whether, when you refer to VB, you mean VB or VB.NET. Either way, I would suggest that steering your client to a technology you personally feel comfortable with isn't a good business strategy - the client's needs should take priority, and there really can't be a good business case for them to spend thousands of quid meeting your requirements, when you should be meeting theirs.

PHP and its associated libraries are very far from being God's gift to the world of application development. But you can't seriously suggest that VB(+/-.NET) is any better. VB(+/-.NET) is one of the most syntactically poor languages to still have any traction in the marketplace. What traction it has is entirely dependent on legacy code, or the existence of permy legacy coders within IT departments. For any new application VB Classic (is that what they call it now?) is the wrong solution; and although Microsoft won't tell you this, for a .NET solution, VB.NET is also the wrong solution. VB.NET is (within Microsoft) very much regarded as the rod they made for their own backs. As soon as they can ditch it without losing face, they will. (Although it'll be couched in terms of "providing continuing support for existing products until the announced EOL date" because MS don't like to say "dead".)

Whatever you do, don't fsck your clients over by getting them to buy into dead technologies just so you can stay in your comfort zone. It means you'll never grow, and they can potentially give you grief down the line for selling them antiquated rubbish.

I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but just get real. If you came to me saying a £10,000-initial-investment VB solution (for any value of VB) was the preferred solution when a negligible-initial-investment PHP solution was to hand, I'd have you chucked out of the door - and I'd tell the chucker-outers to make sure you landed on something sharp.

Things change. My assembly language skills from the Eighties have no commercial value to me now. My PHP skills do, and they are informed by my experience as an assembly language programmer, and indeed by my experience in every single language I've ever used. Programming isn't about languages and libraries. It's about programming.

The technology moves on. Sometimes you don't like where it moves to. Suck it up; follow the money.

Don't frighten the money away, and definitely don't suggest that they spend the money on Microsoft rubbish when they could spend it on you, if you can be bothered to learn some new skills.

Oh, and before you give them to your clients, make sure you know those libraries inside out (the language is easy). Believe me, clients have a feeling of dull resignation when problems arise; but they love it when they get in touch and you can say straight away that you think you know exactly how and why it might have happened, even if it turns out to be something else entirely

You are the most boring man alive.

[DimPrawn]

You are the most boring man alive.

No! sasguru's dead?

[tay]

No! sasguru's dead?

Dont know, dont care.

NF takes boring to a whole new level, I am not the leats bit surprised he is single. Its not to bad talking about boring stuff... but going on and on and on .... thats a talent of mind boggling boredom.

[DimPrawn]

Dont know, dont care.

NF takes boring to a whole new level, I am not the leats bit surprised he is single. Its not to bad talking about boring stuff... but going on and on and on .... thats a talent of mind boggling boredom.

NF has been locked in a server room for last 10 yrs. This is his only contact with the outside world.