3 ms·

You're making a mistake. The question is not whether to start a company with PHP vs language X. The company is long started. The question is not whether or not

You're making a mistake. The question is not whether to start a company with PHP vs language X. The company is long started. The question is not whether or not to poof into existence a port from all of FB to language X. That's not possible. The question is, given that PHP is the current language, with all its faults, will it it cost more (including all definitions of cost) to make the switch? How long will it take? Does it get the job done? How bad is the damage? The question more pertinent to your argument is, did they make a mistake years ago choosing PHP? That's when the could have conceivably gone with language X. BTW the types of stuff you're listing are documented here. So thorough it's amusing to read: http://me.veekun.com/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/ http://me.veekun.com/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-de...

eevee 13y ago
Why thank you :)
lectrick 13y ago
> The question is, given that PHP is the current language, with all its faults, will it it cost more (including all definitions of cost) to make the switch? How long will it take? Does it get the job done? How bad is the damage? An excellent point. Which in fact is an argument in favor of modularizing your code as much as possible, as early as possible. There are tools now like Apache Thrift which make this easier: http://thrift.apache.org/ http://thrift.apache.org/
bad_user 13y ago
> The question is not whether or not to poof into existence a port from all of FB to language X. That's not possible. And yet Twitter has slowly migrated on the backend from Ruby to Scala/Java. They still use Ruby for the frontend, though it's not clear to what extent, since they've also migrated to a single-page, fat client design on the desktop. And at the very least, their choice of using Ruby when prototyping, was at least sane. I understand that large codebases can't be migrated easily. But you can migrate individual components when needed, if you have a modular, service-oriented design. Also - building new functionality in PHP is indefensible, unless their code-base is one big monolithic hairball, which I doubt it is.

eevee 13y ago

Why thank you :)

lectrick 13y ago

> The question is, given that PHP is the current language, with all its faults, will it it cost more (including all definitions of cost) to make the switch? How long will it take? Does it get the job done? How bad is the damage? An excellent point. Which in fact is an argument in favor of modularizing your code as much as possible, as early as possible. There are tools now like Apache Thrift which make this easier: http://thrift.apache.org/ http://thrift.apache.org/

bad_user 13y ago

> The question is not whether or not to poof into existence a port from all of FB to language X. That's not possible. And yet Twitter has slowly migrated on the backend from Ruby to Scala/Java. They still use Ruby for the frontend, though it's not clear to what extent, since they've also migrated to a single-page, fat client design on the desktop. And at the very least, their choice of using Ruby when prototyping, was at least sane. I understand that large codebases can't be migrated easily. But you can migrate individual components when needed, if you have a modular, service-oriented design. Also - building new functionality in PHP is indefensible, unless their code-base is one big monolithic hairball, which I doubt it is.