Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-11 Thread Robert Cummings
tedd wrote: Rob: If I could understand what the Hell you are talking about, I'd be a better programmer. You're a bit like Einstein talking to a bunch of High School Physics Teachers. We nod our collective heads thinking "huh?" while hoping there isn't going to be a test. If you want me to

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-11 Thread tedd
At 10:00 AM -0400 5/11/10, Robert Cummings wrote: Nathan Nobbe wrote: i did gander at robs template system in interjinn once, but never got my head wrapped round it; honestly i only gave it a day or so. i prefer to go the typical route as per above, and omit the bloat that systems like smarty,

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-11 Thread tedd
At 1:34 AM -0600 5/11/10, Nathan Nobbe wrote: -snip- if theres one thing i tend to stay away from, or start deleting the second i inherit a new codebase, its smarty. ive never seen anything more bloated & ridiculous. hey, lets all learn *another* set of conventions & syntax on top of what we've

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-11 Thread Robert Cummings
Nathan Nobbe wrote: i did gander at robs template system in interjinn once, but never got my head wrapped round it; honestly i only gave it a day or so. i prefer to go the typical route as per above, and omit the bloat that systems like smarty, savant etc bring to the table. nothing personal da

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-11 Thread Nathan Rixham
Nathan Nobbe wrote: On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 9:19 PM, David McGlone wrote: On Monday 10 May 2010 22:15:44 Paul M Foster wrote: On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 06:09:00PM -0400, David McGlone wrote: On Monday 10 May 2010 13:04:36 richard gray wrote: On 10/05/2010 18:17, Ashley Sheridan wrote: It mak

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-11 Thread Nathan Nobbe
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 9:19 PM, David McGlone wrote: > On Monday 10 May 2010 22:15:44 Paul M Foster wrote: > > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 06:09:00PM -0400, David McGlone wrote: > > > On Monday 10 May 2010 13:04:36 richard gray wrote: > > > > On 10/05/2010 18:17, Ashley Sheridan wrote: > > > > > It

RE: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-11 Thread Arno Kuhl
-Original Message- From: richard gray [mailto:r...@richgray.com] Sent: 10 May 2010 07:05 PM Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre On 10/05/2010 18:17, Ashley Sheridan wrote: > It makes sense sometimes to have different files for different > sections of a website. For e

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread Robert Cummings
Paul M Foster wrote: On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:37:21PM -0400, Robert Cummings wrote: Paul M Foster wrote: Lots of people use templating systems and particularly Smarty. Here's the difference between a templating system and just hand-coding: Hand coding-- Templating system: (Okay, I

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread Paul M Foster
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:37:21PM -0400, Robert Cummings wrote: > Paul M Foster wrote: >> >> Lots of people use templating systems and particularly Smarty. Here's >> the difference between a templating system and just hand-coding: >> >> Hand coding-- >> >> >> >> Templating system: >> >> >> >

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread Robert Cummings
Paul M Foster wrote: On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 06:09:00PM -0400, David McGlone wrote: On Monday 10 May 2010 13:04:36 richard gray wrote: On 10/05/2010 18:17, Ashley Sheridan wrote: It makes sense sometimes to have different files for different sections of a website. For example, blog.php, galle

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread David McGlone
On Monday 10 May 2010 22:15:44 Paul M Foster wrote: > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 06:09:00PM -0400, David McGlone wrote: > > On Monday 10 May 2010 13:04:36 richard gray wrote: > > > On 10/05/2010 18:17, Ashley Sheridan wrote: > > > > It makes sense sometimes to have different files for different > > >

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread Paul M Foster
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 06:09:00PM -0400, David McGlone wrote: > On Monday 10 May 2010 13:04:36 richard gray wrote: > > On 10/05/2010 18:17, Ashley Sheridan wrote: > > > It makes sense sometimes to have different files for different sections > > > of a website. For example, blog.php, gallery.php,

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread David McGlone
On Monday 10 May 2010 13:04:36 richard gray wrote: > On 10/05/2010 18:17, Ashley Sheridan wrote: > > It makes sense sometimes to have different files for different sections > > of a website. For example, blog.php, gallery.php, cart.php could deal > > with the blog, gallery and shopping cart section

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread richard gray
On 10/05/2010 18:17, Ashley Sheridan wrote: It makes sense sometimes to have different files for different sections of a website. For example, blog.php, gallery.php, cart.php could deal with the blog, gallery and shopping cart sections for an artists website. Yes, it could all be achieved with on

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread Peter Lind
On 10 May 2010 18:17, Ashley Sheridan wrote: > > >> >> 3} Unless the site is small and has few pages and applications, it is almost >> impossible to maintain. >> > > I disagree here. As long as there are useful naming conventions for all > of the files (I've seen projects where files have been nam

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread Al
On 5/10/2010 12:17 PM, Ashley Sheridan wrote: 3} Unless the site is small and has few pages and applications, it is almost impossible to maintain. I disagree here. As long as there are useful naming conventions for all of the files (I've seen projects where files have been named 1.php, 2

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread Paul M Foster
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 05:17:16PM +0100, Ashley Sheridan wrote: > > > > > > 3} Unless the site is small and has few pages and applications, it > is almost > > impossible to maintain. > > > > I disagree here. As long as there are useful naming conventions for all > of the files (I've seen proje

Re: [PHP] Re: PHP Application Structre

2010-05-10 Thread Ashley Sheridan
> > 3} Unless the site is small and has few pages and applications, it is almost > impossible to maintain. > I disagree here. As long as there are useful naming conventions for all of the files (I've seen projects where files have been named 1.php, 2.php, etc. I wanted to bloody kill the deve