> Facebook levels of load would be a great problem to have. Until then, who cares? It shows up a lot faster than at Facebook levels of load. Because php throws

> Facebook levels of load would be a great problem to have. Until then, who cares? It shows up a lot faster than at Facebook levels of load. Because php throws everything out at the end of every request, you're going to need to buy a lot more servers a lot more often if your app does take off. Or you end up paying zend lots of money for things like caching that are built into nearly every other language. > Doubtful, but this isn't even a good point. Working software is the important deliverable. Until you're stymied next year because your current codebase is falling apart. > You missed the point. Writing a web app with a language that's basically tied to the web makes sense. It's not the most important point, but it isn't 'nonsense'. I'd much rather have a language isn't tied to any particular ideology. Yes, your clients are web-based at the moment, but your database isn't web-based, your mail server isn't web-based, etc. Driving everything by your presentation layer is a terrible, superficial way of looking at problems. > He said as much in that point. Did you bother reading and thinking about the article, or just trip over your own drool racing to the comments section? I'm just going to stop here. The original blog author posted this with an air of php exceptionalism. Other languages equally have no problem handling the issues that this author claims exist. This blog post, and your response, is a classic example of the php hammer syndrome. Yes, it kind of works, and seems neat at a superficial level, but once you start to use it, you start seeing all of the glaring flaws in the actual delivery of the product. Workarounds become dogma, and everyone suffers as a result.