2012/4/13 Arvids Godjuks <arvids.godj...@gmail.com>:
> Well, i can say that any template engine that is not a pure php extension
> does template inclusion via an include of a file with html and embedded php
> code. Because to make things fast you have to convert your templates from
> tags and pseudo code to that state and cache the result so not to make
> parsing on every request.
>
> And right now there is a standard for autoloading the libraries and
> frameworks that most big players agreed on, that will make loading of 3rd
> party stuff easy. Untill one converts to pphp and other does not.
> Autoloadijg will just break because of mixed approaches.

Good point.

Although there may be name conflicts, script/script_once would
be better and has more compatibility. Let just make types of
include decided how it behave.

Regards,

--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohg...@ohgaki.net

>
> Hm, you wrote that you have configured php only with IIS and Apache (any
> *nix expirience?). Try nginx, see for yourself how different it is.
>
> 13.04.2012 3:05 пользователь "Kris Craig" <kris.cr...@gmail.com> написал:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 5:46 PM, David Muir <davidkm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >  On 13/04/12 10:04, Kris Craig wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 4:46 PM, David Muir <davidkm...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>  On 13/04/12 09:38, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote:
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > 2012/4/13 Kris Craig <kris.cr...@gmail.com>:
>> >> >> Per recent discussions, I have drafted an RFC for this.  This
>> >> >> proposal
>> >> >> offers what I believe to be a more sane and realistic approach to
>> >> >> addressing the question of incorporating a new breed of tag-less PHP
>> >> >> scripts.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/phpp
>> >> > This may work for LFI issue for new codes.
>> >> > Few questions.
>> >> >
>> >> > CLI may use .phpp as PHP script always. (i.e. execute w/o <?php or
>> >> > else)
>> >> > It's like DOS, though.
>> >> >
>> >> > How do you enforce .phpp as script only for Web?
>> >> > Is it a rule for configuration? or .phpp just never supposed to
>> >> > locate
>> >> > under docroot?
>> >> > It relates previous question. How about bootstrap script for
>> >> > frameworks?
>> >> >
>> >> >> A regular .php script cannot be included from a .phpp script. An
>> >> E_WARNING will be thrown for include and an E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR will be
>> >> thrown for require; in both instances, the included file will be
>> >> ignored.
>> >> > Some people may try to make .phpp handled by web.
>> >> > I cannot tell if this setting is going to be popular, but if it
>> >> > does, isn't it the end of embedded PHP?
>> >> > It might be good if PHP is more tolerant for this usage.
>> >> >
>> >> > Regards,
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Yasuo Ohgaki
>> >> > yohg...@ohgaki.net
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>  That's a huge WTF that a templating library can't be written as .phpp,
>> >> because it then won't be able to load a template.
>> >>
>> >
>> > That's actually not true.  Please refer to the diagram embedded in the
>> > RFC.
>> >
>> > Basically, you can load a template just fine-- you just can't do it
>> > directly from a .phpp file, which you shouldn't be doing, anyway.  The
>> > .phpp file is, at least for the most part, intended to be included from
>> > a
>> > regular .php file, which also would include whatever you're using for
>> > your
>> > templates.  In other words, they can interact just fine; you just can't
>> > put
>> > the template upstream from a .phpp file in the include stack-- which,
>> > again, you really shouldn't be doing, anyway, as it's just bad
>> > architecture.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > How is this bad architecture? Every framework I've seen that has some
>> > kind
>> > of templating layer that handles the scope and inclusion of the
>> > template,
>> > and it happens further down the chain from the controlling code.
>> >
>> > Zend_View, Twig or Smarty would have to remain as .php and not .phpp,
>> > otherwise they wouldn't be able to render the templates.
>> >
>> > In the case of Zend Framwork, which I'm most familiar with, the
>> > application, front controller, dispatcher, and action controllers, and
>> > some
>> > services would have to remain as .php so that templates could be
>> > executed.
>> >
>> > Oh, and the autoloader can't be .phpp either. But then if it's .php,
>> > then
>> > the autoloader can't be called from .phpp files to include .php files.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > David
>> >
>>
>> It's been awhile since I've used Smarty, but unless my memory is failing
>> me, I'm pretty sure it's not restricted to being several points removed
>> upstream as you described.  I'm not familiar with Zend_View or Twig so I
>> can't comment on those.
>>
>> Thing is, there's no reason why you can't hook any framework into this.
>> Worst-case scenario, if the library you're hooking into has a rigid
>> structure, just write a simple controller class layer to operate on top of
>> it, then use that same controller class to interface with the .phpp stack.
>> Problem solved.  It's really not as complicated or confusing as you're
>> making it out to be.
>>
>> --Kris

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to