Hello Zeev, I would like to point out that PHP has been changing over the last few years from a language that Rasmus used for his online resume to an enterprise grade application development language. I've personally watched it go from PHP3 -> PHP4 -> PHP5, and *much* anticipate the future releases because they empower me and my company to do so many things that were previously not possible or very difficult. OO, for example, aids us greatly in implementing business logic, but I would hate to use it for *everything*.
Please don't lose sight of where PHP is going. There are *alot* of experienced programmers who crave more powerful features that they previously emulated or worked around. On the other hand, there are tons of people who still include($_GET['file']) or put untrusted input straight into a database query. Ignorant people will be ignorant. Giving them the truth about these matters is the best way to fight it, not to take away highly useful features from the people who could really use them. From: http://zend.com/company/overview.php "As the meteoric growth of PHP continues, it is clear that it has become a relevant and significant development language. Any corporation building enterprise-grade applications would be wise to consider the open source development platform as a strong competitor to traditional commercial solutions." I personally like MySQL's methodology of adding many features, but not sacrificing speed, stability, or security. Thanks. PS: This whole issue strangely reminds me of http://slashdot.org/articles/04/01/08/0111228.shtml?tid=152&tid=185 -- Best regards, Jason mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sunday, November 27, 2005, 3:54:43 PM, you wrote: ZS> At 22:18 27/11/2005, Nicolas Bérard Nault wrote: >>Goto exists in C. If you affirm that goto should >>not exist in PHP because it gives the >>opportunity to screw their code to programmers, >>are you also affirming that C programmers are smarter than PHP programmers ? ZS> I wouldn't make any statement regarding the ZS> intelligence level of C and PHP developers, since ZS> there are plenty of idiots and smart people on ZS> both camps; It has everything to do with ZS> training and experience. And the training and ZS> experience levels of the average PHP developer is ZS> nowhere near that of the average C/C++ developer. ZS> Sorry for repeating it for the 1001st time in the ZS> few years, but PHP did not get to where it is ZS> today because we added everything and the kitchen ZS> sink, that's Perl. I would *really* be great if ZS> people realized that PHP the way it is now is ZS> successful, but it's not inherent to the PHP ZS> project. Not every bunch of features we pack ZS> under the name "PHP" will retain this level of success. ZS> We *can* screw it if we go in the wrong ZS> direction, and adding redundant features which ZS> are useful in rare cases and much more likely to ZS> be abused than to be properly used is a good step ZS> in that direction. A lot of people are saying we ZS> already went too far with PHP 5, and that's ZS> arguable. It's clear, however, that adding more ZS> and more language features and making PHP more ZS> and more complex is not a good recipe. ZS> Zeev ZS> -- ZS> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List ZS> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
