Re: .inc or .anything - better or worse ?

There is no standard -- as there shouldn't be. .inc is just by practice. Technically it is all the same, there is no speed gain or loss because of the name of your files. -jeremy brand Jeremy Brand :: Sr. Software Engineer :: 408-245-9058 :: jeremy@nirvani.net http://www.JeremyBrand.com/Jeremy/Brand/Jeremy_Brand.html for more Get your own Free, Private email at http://www.smackdown.com/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - At least for the people who send me mail about a new language that they're designing, the general advice is: do it to learn about how to write a compiler. --Dennis Ritchie On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Alex Black wrote: > Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 18:00:50 -0800 > From: Alex Black <enigma@turingstudio.com> > To: php-general@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP] .inc or .anything - better or worse ? > > in binarycloud (I'll get to that in a minute) .inc is used for some stuff > (specifically database access objects), but I've also used .lib (for > libraries, doi :) .php, .conf, and a few others. > > In that case, though, everything that is included in in a pretty defined, > big hierarchy of directories that is _always_ outside of DocRoot. Personally > I think storing any includes in docroot is bad practice: if you don't want > 'em to see it, and it doesn't have to be there, put it somewhere else :) > > On the stuff we've been doing with binarycloud, I've set .html to be > processed because we specifically allow access to files though our > permissions systems (except gifs and css, which would be annoying and > pointless to control) > > I haven't noticed any performance hit from doing that. apache/php is already > so ridiculously fast - unless you're trying to run a big site of a celeron > with no ram :) > > .inc is clear (include me!) - but so long as its clear what something is > for, I haven't seen any standard adhered to :) > > ---- > > ok, the part about binarycloud: > some of you list old-timers may remember me talking about binarycloud a > couple months ago. I didn't disappear, neither did binarycloud :) > > for those of you who don't know what the hell I'm talking about: > > binarycloud is an opensource system written entirely in PHP, which serves as > a platform for building big webapps. it's meaty, beefy, big 'n bouncy :) > > my team is standardizing the comments for all the base code, and we're going > to have PHPDoc-generated API documentation before the first release... as > soon as that's done (probably a week or so) we'll release the whole thing. > > the basic idea is to provide a _complete_ set of integrated tools: > > advanced, robust error handling that is logged to your database, > authentication, group-based file-level access permissions, a really, really > cool template engine, database abstraction (metabase), something like 30 > libraries: a multi-page form builder with string checking, cleaning, > unspoofable... a table builder which uses template files (think table > styles), a string type verification library, a string filtering/cleaning > library, email, shopping cart, etc etc. > > probably overkill if you're building a small site, perfect if you're > building something pretty big :) > > also, it's production. meaning we're running it in real, load-balanced > webserver clusters. it's very stable, and it rocks :) > > the intent is to have a solid foundation that people like building > applications on top of, so we maintain this core codeset, and watch the > library of cool, compatible apps grow! Imagine being able to just plug in a > knowledge base to your site, or forums, or a catalog engine, etc. > > anyway, soon! > > :) > > _a > > > -- > Alex Black, Head Monkey > enigma@turingstudio.com > > The Turing Studio, Inc. > http://www.turingstudio.com > > vox+510.666.0074 > fax+510.666.0093 > > Saul Zaentz Film Center > 2600 Tenth St Suite 433 > Berkeley, CA 94710-2522 > > > > > > From: chris@ideal.net.au (Chris Aitken) > > Newsgroups: php.general > > Date: 5 Dec 2000 15:27:11 -0800 > > Subject: [PHP] .inc or .anything - better or worse ? > > > > At 09:59 AM 28/11/2000, you wrote: > > > >> Most people add .inc to their PHP parser - AFAIK this is kind of a standard > >> practice. A person looking at main.inc would get "Document Contained No > >> Data". > >> Not a huge security risk IMO - of course mine are outside of the docroot ;O) > > > > Is there any specific why it an unwritten law that included files are .inc ? > > > > The first ever tutorial I did for PHP actually made included files .php and > > the reason it said this was because some places may not protect .inc (or > > other extentions) and also may not allow you access to go back a directory > > and use that area. > > > > Ive been using .php for all my included files (mostly all my functions are > > in these files) and never had a problem but it seems that most people use > > .inc instead. > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > -- > > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: php-general-unsubscribe@lists.php.net > > For additional commands, e-mail: php-general-help@lists.php.net > > To contact the list administrators, e-mail: php-list-admin@lists.php.net > > > > > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, e-mail: php-general-unsubscribe@lists.php.net > For additional commands, e-mail: php-general-help@lists.php.net > To contact the list administrators, e-mail: php-list-admin@lists.php.net > >