4 ms·
I'm not fully on board with all of Roberts views but this point about a framework for frameworks sake is one I agree with. https://youtu.be/o_TH-Y78tt4 https:/
by lugg 7y ago
I'm not fully on board with all of Roberts views but this point about a framework for frameworks sake is one I agree with.
https://youtu.be/o_TH-Y78tt4 https://youtu.be/o_TH-Y78tt4 starting at around 10:30 he gets into what I was getting at.
> Whereas I'd say Laravel and it's ecosystem are far more productive and time saving than simply using just PHP.
I'm not arguing a time thing.
I'm arguing that a framework that forces its architecture onto your domain model is fundamentally broken by design. My domain should drive architecture choices and the framework should let me augment that with well worn libraries and modular patterns.
Laravels architecture works for one thing: web sites. And for that, you're better off using WordPress.
Laravel is better than older frameworks, like say, code igniter but it still fights you every step of the way if you want to step outside the box.
- whycombagator 7y ago> Laravels architecture works for one thing: web sites. From the github repo: “Laravel is a web application framework with expressive, elegant syntax”
- lugg 7y agoWeb applications are not websites.
- whycombagator 7y agoI want to understand your points more clearly. > Laravels architecture works for one thing: web sites. And for that, you're better off using WordPress. > Laravel is better than older frameworks, like say, code igniter but it still fights you every step of the way if you want to step outside the box. Can you provide actual examples of where it "fights you every step of the way"? > Web applications are not websites. So can I infer that a building a web application with Laravel would be stepping "outside the box"? If so, could you please give examples of how building a web application with Laravel "fights you every step of the way"?