That's funny and all, but it doesn't drive home much more of a point than "PHP is bad because PHP is bad". The insinuation that all "houses" built with PHP are

That's funny and all, but it doesn't drive home much more of a point than "PHP is bad because PHP is bad". The insinuation that all "houses" built with PHP are defective and waiting to fall apart is so obviously untrue that it feels unworthy of discussion. A more reasonable analogy would be that there's a standardized toolbox that carpenters use that's weird, quirky and sometimes so bad that you need to know workarounds to use it correctly, but the houses that are being built do what they're supposed to in the vast majority of cases because most of the carpenters know the quirks well. The question then is, if you're contracting someone to build your house, or you're the manager of a construction company, do you go with the standard toolbox that's used by the X% majority of carpenters, or do you hire carpenters that use more obscure (but functionally "better") toolboxes while running the risk of now ending up with unmaintainable or deviating houses that are hard to recruit additional carpenters for because they refuse to work on what is quite objectively "non-standard" houses? The answer in my mind is no less complex than it would be for software development: it depends, and you should be wary of anyone telling you that it's "obvious" that the answer is one or the other.