4 ms·
I know the author emphasizing a point, but the steps that he's described end with two vastly different results: 1 - A php script on a server with a script with
by joebeetee 13y ago
I know the author emphasizing a point, but the steps that he's described end with two vastly different results:
1 - A php script on a server with a script with some code on it.
vs
2 - A full featured MVC framework, complete with version control, database integration, easy deployment, which is easy for other developer to jump into, etc etc
How can these two options be equated?
- mscottmcbee 13y agoA lot (a majority?) of websites aren't made by people that need those things. A lot of people just want to get their ideas up on a page so they can show their friends. The thing I walked away with from the article was that PHP is still active in part because it has such a low entry point for those people, where as Rails does not. Like you said, they're very different entities, but a lot of people can't tell or don't care about the difference.
- AdrianRossouw 13y agoi'm personally learning to love static html again. the longer i can get away without a users database the better.