5 ms·

Eddy - Super-light PHP 5.3 Web App Framework

20 points by simonhamp 16y ago

hybrid11 16y ago
has anyone tried using it, and benchmarked it ... curious to know how it compares to other PHP frameworks.
ehutch79 16y ago
one thing to say: docs or it didn't happen.
Zeebo 16y ago
Oh, god, not ANOTHER one.
petervandijck 16y ago
I'm trying http://fuelphp.com/ http://fuelphp.com/ these days, also new, from ex-codeigniter, ex-kohana dudes. In other words, they've learnt some lessons from the other ones. Not bad so far.
- noodle 16y ago
  it looks good. have any other specific thoughts on it? strengths/weaknesses?
  - petervandijck 16y ago
    Well, it seems basically pretty codeigniter-like, but much improved, dropping legacy stuff. The docs still need work (they don't even mention the form lib for example), I might help out with that. I hope they take it to a stable and well documented 1.0 (they're in beta now).
    - noodle 16y ago
      think the CI community branch will detract any from this project?
      - petervandijck 16y ago
        No, in fact, some of the same people are involved. The CI community thing will still be CI. This is fresh, from the ground up.
        noodle 16y ago
        i know, and that is what i meant, actually. looks like a good bit of crossover, and if they're going to work on CI community, too, that probably means less work on fuel. and who knows, maybe there's some sort of contractual obligations in there, as well.
- keso 16y ago
  I don't like how they use static methods for almost everything.
  - rickmb 16y ago
    Thanks for the heads up, now I know I don't even have to bother checking it out...
  - smoody 16y ago
    What's the downside with static methods? It makes sense to me that they use them for factories and now that the can be effectively overridden in PHP5.3, I'm not sure why it's a bad thing... perhaps just a personal preference?
- simonhamp 16y ago
  I'm going to be giving that a go too at some point. Probably just for benchmarking though ;)
ryeguy 16y ago
First, why is this framework using __autoload? spl_register_autoloader should be used here. Otherwise, other frameworks (like doctrine, zend, etc) can't register their autoloaders. Second, why require 5.3 and not use namespaces? Should be e.g. Eddy\Controller instead of EddyController. Third, why so many global functions? Pretty much all of these would be better suited as static functions on a class. Lastly, why use mysqli? Now whoever uses this has to use mysql. It easily could have been made to use PDO, and should have. There is no reason to use mysqli. Sorry for the criticism, but there are so many of these out there that new ones pretty much have to be flawless to even matter. This framework just seems to be made by someone who doesn't pay any attention to how other major frameworks and the rest of the community are doing things.
- st0p 16y ago
  Even though I agree with point 1, 2 and 4, I'm not with you on point 3. Why take OO to an extreme when there is no technical nor functional reason to do so? The best example is Math.Sin(x) vs. Sin(x)... There is no valid reason (IMHO) to go for the Math.Sin() approach in PHP. It doesn't add anything, except more keystrokes. Of course if your language is entirely OO (like C# or Java), you can't avoid constructs like Math.Sin(). Even though I prefer C# and Java above PHP, it has always annoyed me that I needed to prefix those kind of functions with a class name. I understand that it is a trade off in language design and forcing you to think in objects is mostly a good thing (if you leave functional programming out of the equation). However, if your language supports functions outside of objects, why not use them? [disclaimer]I didn't look at the actual code, so I'm not sure if there are functions that indeed should have been (static) members of a class.[/disclaimer]
- simonhamp 16y ago
  1. It's not meant to be used with other frameworks :) 2. Namespaces are nonsense in 5.3. I've created my own way of namespacing which is much nicer in my opinion 3. The global functions are being worked through: it's early days... less of those to come 4. MySQLi because that's what I use. Limits my support costs As with any open source framework, you can actually change it to suit your needs. It's not for everyone, if you want those things go elsewhere. This is what I use to get my apps started - they start quicker, finish sooner, work faster. It's not an exercise in 'best practice', it's about getting the job done - actually building an app that works!
FR6 16y ago
There is no documentation? No examples?
- simonhamp 16y ago
  Documentation and examples are steadily building up on GitHub's Wiki system, I may move it from there at some point, but it works for now
simonhamp 16y ago
It's early days folks, so I'm just getting it out there. Appreciate all the comments and feedback... of course if anyone wants to help develop, please feel free to fork on GitHub... it is an open source community after all right?

20 points by simonhamp 16y ago

hybrid11 16y ago

has anyone tried using it, and benchmarked it ... curious to know how it compares to other PHP frameworks.

ehutch79 16y ago

one thing to say: docs or it didn't happen.

Zeebo 16y ago

Oh, god, not ANOTHER one.

petervandijck 16y ago

I'm trying http://fuelphp.com/ http://fuelphp.com/ these days, also new, from ex-codeigniter, ex-kohana dudes. In other words, they've learnt some lessons from the other ones. Not bad so far.

noodle 16y ago
it looks good. have any other specific thoughts on it? strengths/weaknesses?
- petervandijck 16y ago
  Well, it seems basically pretty codeigniter-like, but much improved, dropping legacy stuff. The docs still need work (they don't even mention the form lib for example), I might help out with that. I hope they take it to a stable and well documented 1.0 (they're in beta now).
  - noodle 16y ago
    think the CI community branch will detract any from this project?
    - petervandijck 16y ago
      No, in fact, some of the same people are involved. The CI community thing will still be CI. This is fresh, from the ground up.
      - noodle 16y ago
        i know, and that is what i meant, actually. looks like a good bit of crossover, and if they're going to work on CI community, too, that probably means less work on fuel. and who knows, maybe there's some sort of contractual obligations in there, as well.
keso 16y ago
I don't like how they use static methods for almost everything.
- rickmb 16y ago
  Thanks for the heads up, now I know I don't even have to bother checking it out...
- smoody 16y ago
  What's the downside with static methods? It makes sense to me that they use them for factories and now that the can be effectively overridden in PHP5.3, I'm not sure why it's a bad thing... perhaps just a personal preference?
simonhamp 16y ago
I'm going to be giving that a go too at some point. Probably just for benchmarking though ;)

ryeguy 16y ago

First, why is this framework using __autoload? spl_register_autoloader should be used here. Otherwise, other frameworks (like doctrine, zend, etc) can't register their autoloaders. Second, why require 5.3 and not use namespaces? Should be e.g. Eddy\Controller instead of EddyController. Third, why so many global functions? Pretty much all of these would be better suited as static functions on a class. Lastly, why use mysqli? Now whoever uses this has to use mysql. It easily could have been made to use PDO, and should have. There is no reason to use mysqli. Sorry for the criticism, but there are so many of these out there that new ones pretty much have to be flawless to even matter. This framework just seems to be made by someone who doesn't pay any attention to how other major frameworks and the rest of the community are doing things.

st0p 16y ago
Even though I agree with point 1, 2 and 4, I'm not with you on point 3. Why take OO to an extreme when there is no technical nor functional reason to do so? The best example is Math.Sin(x) vs. Sin(x)... There is no valid reason (IMHO) to go for the Math.Sin() approach in PHP. It doesn't add anything, except more keystrokes. Of course if your language is entirely OO (like C# or Java), you can't avoid constructs like Math.Sin(). Even though I prefer C# and Java above PHP, it has always annoyed me that I needed to prefix those kind of functions with a class name. I understand that it is a trade off in language design and forcing you to think in objects is mostly a good thing (if you leave functional programming out of the equation). However, if your language supports functions outside of objects, why not use them? [disclaimer]I didn't look at the actual code, so I'm not sure if there are functions that indeed should have been (static) members of a class.[/disclaimer]
simonhamp 16y ago
1. It's not meant to be used with other frameworks :) 2. Namespaces are nonsense in 5.3. I've created my own way of namespacing which is much nicer in my opinion 3. The global functions are being worked through: it's early days... less of those to come 4. MySQLi because that's what I use. Limits my support costs As with any open source framework, you can actually change it to suit your needs. It's not for everyone, if you want those things go elsewhere. This is what I use to get my apps started - they start quicker, finish sooner, work faster. It's not an exercise in 'best practice', it's about getting the job done - actually building an app that works!

FR6 16y ago

There is no documentation? No examples?

simonhamp 16y ago
Documentation and examples are steadily building up on GitHub's Wiki system, I may move it from there at some point, but it works for now

simonhamp 16y ago

It's early days folks, so I'm just getting it out there. Appreciate all the comments and feedback... of course if anyone wants to help develop, please feel free to fork on GitHub... it is an open source community after all right?