Re: Form display and processing module?
| From: | Rasmus Lerdorf | Date: | Fri, 07 May 2004 17:21:03 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Form display and processing module? | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Groups: | php.pecl.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pecl-dev+get-626@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Fri, 7 May 2004, David Sklar wrote:
> OK, point taken. To clarify this divide for me, where do these things fall:
>
> - a db interface layer like PDO
> - if it didn't exist already, setcookie() (instead of just using header())
For something like form generation there are a lot of different ways to do
it and you will have a hard time getting people to agree on how to do it.
Personally I can't stand how that Quickform stuff does it, for example,
and pushing something highlevel like this on everyone has never been PHP's
approach. We give people basic building blocks that they can then use in
their own frameworks and as integral parts of their own approach to
solving the web problem.
SetCookie is a shortcut for a common task that in no way forces a certain
style on anybody.
Database abstraction has always been a sticky point. I am clearly one of
the main anti-abstraction folks around. ext/dbx never caught on. If PDO
can do a better job then maybe it will one day be shipped with PHP.
Some very simple rules for things that automatically disqualify you from
being part of the core of PHP:
1. Do you consider yourself a framework?
2. Do you spit out HTML?
3. Do you have a non-trivial RINIT/RSHUTDOWN function?
4. Is your extension likely to be used by very few PHP users?
If you don't have an emphatic No to each of these, at best you can try to
get into the default PEAR packages that ship with PHP. And as you have no
doubt noticed we have been trying hard to reduce the amount of stuff in
the core and put a much stronger emphasis on PEAR and PECL. When people
get more used to PEAR or PECL dependencies for PHP applications, things
will improve.
-Rasmus