<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>PHPDeveloper.org</title>
    <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org</link>
    <description>Up-to-the Minute PHP News, views and community</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 08:46:59 -0500</pubDate>
    <ttl>30</ttl>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[devReview.com: The Big List of PHP Frameworks]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/11694</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/11694</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
The devReview.com website has put together <a href="http://devreview.com/big-list-of-php-frameworks/">The Big List</a> of as many of the PHP frameworks out there they could find:
</p>
<blockquote>
For the start of a new year, it was time to clean out the list of PHP frameworks. A few have fallen by the wayside, but many new ones have been added. It seems that patterns and MVC is still all the rage, but less are professing to being Rails clones, though the inspiration of convention is still strong. There are a wide variety of framework types. From full stack (cakePHP, Symfony) to components (eZ), a bit of both (Zend) and minimalist (LightVC, TinyMVC, Pluf).
</blockquote>
<p>
Requirements to be on the list include that the framework must be PHP-based, have a recent code release in the last 12 months, needs to be available in English and not including frameworks that can be considered content systems themselves. 
</p>
<p>
As of the time of this post, there are around 50 active frameworks listed - everything from CakePHP and the Zend Framework out to eZ Components and Prado. Links for each include their project homepage and some reviews the site has done.
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:12:10 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Felix Geisendorfer's Blog: MacGyver menu for CakePHP - What's the active menu item?]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/8200</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/8200</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
In <a href="http://www.thinkingphp.org/2007/07/08/macgyver-menu-for-cakephp-whats-the-active-menu-item/">a new post</a> to his blog today, <i>Felix Geisendorfer</i> talks about view coding - specifically working with a menu and determining which element is active.
</p>
<blockquote>
One of the challenges many of us have faced before and will face in future is building a menu. Now this of course is very simple assuming that we're just shooting for a static &lt;ul> with some &lt;li>'s containing the links. However the tricky part is to figure out what is the active menu item. I had some code doing this in the past but tried out a new flavor of it today which I call the MacGyver menu for CakePHP as it's a little dirty yet powerful and easy to maintain.
</blockquote>
<p>
In his included code, he <a href="http://www.thinkingphp.org/2007/07/08/macgyver-menu-for-cakephp-whats-the-active-menu-item/">creates a simple navigation</a> from an array of titles/links and, with some sorting, a regular expression and a CSS class, the selected item can be highlighted simply.
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2007 09:34:00 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[MySQL Performance Blog: Are PHP persistent connections evil ?]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6699</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6699</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
The MySQL Performance Blog takes a look today at a more PHP-related topic - <a href="http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/11/12/are-php-persistent-connections-evil/">persistent connections in PHP</a> and whether or not they are the devil (well, okay, so maybe not quest that bad - just a little evil).
</p>
<blockquote>
The reason behind using persistent connections is of course reducing number of connects which are rather expensive, even though they are much faster with MySQL than with most other databases.
</blockquote>
<p>
They <a href="http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/11/12/are-php-persistent-connections-evil/">go on</a> to talk about:
<ul>
<li>issues with the number of active connections that could come up
<li>the use of too many connections at once
<li>why persistent connections are disabled in the new mysqli extension
</ul>
Their conclusion? Persistent connections are not evil. In fact, they're very good, when used in the right context and for the right kinds of queries. There's also a small push for an even newer MySQL driver for PHP by the MySQL team - the "mysqlnd" driver.
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Nov 2006 09:03:00 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Zend Developer Zone: Case Study w/ Zend Core for IBM with DB2 9 - 10k Active DB Connections]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6484</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6484</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
The Zend Developer Zone has <a href="http://devzone.zend.com/node/view/id/915">information about a case study</a> as performed by IBM and Zend showing the performance of the Zend Core for IBM (DB2 9) to services - you ready for this? - 10,000 active database connections.
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
The PHP application used for this study is a DVD store application that simulates users logging into an online catalog, browsing the catalog, and making DVD purchases. 
</p>
<p>
The solution presented in this paper demonstrates how Zend Core for IBM with IBM DB2 9 performs, scales, and offers the best total cost of ownership. This is showcased by scaling-out Web servers as users to the online store increase. The single DB2 data server manages this without requiring the addition of CPU and memory using its unique connection concentrator feature, which manages and balances the workload on the data server. This solution is able to efficiently service tens of thousands of simultaneous connections to the database using this powerful feature.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
They've included <a href="http://devzone.zend.com/node/view/id/915">complete information</a> on all of the testing and infrastructure they used to achieve this impressive feat. There's even graphs and images for those skimmers out there looking to glean what they can.
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:41:00 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[PHP Magazine: What Is Your Top Consideration for Choosing a CMS? (Poll)]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/5790</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/5790</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
The International PHP Magazine has conducted a poll over on their website, asking visitors what their top considerations were for choosing and working with a CMS. They've <a href="http://www.php-mag.net/magphpde/magphpde_news/psecom,id,26106,nodeid,5.html">posted the results</a> of that poll today.
</p>
<p>
The options provided for the poll were:
<ul>
<li>How is it licensed?
<li>What is the language/environment?
<li>How long has it been around?
<li>Is it actively developed?
<li>Who is using it?
<li>Is there support?
</ul>
</p>
<p>
<a href="http://www.php-mag.net/magphpde/magphpde_news/psecom,id,26106,nodeid,5.html">The results</a> show an overpowering victory for the "actively developed" category, with the licensing and language requirements tying for second place. The option the least number of people cared about? Who was using it...
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2006 11:43:10 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Jim Plush's Blog: I'm Officially a Baker with CakePHP]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/5676</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/5676</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
<i>Jim Plush</i> talks in <a href="http://www.litfuel.net/plush/?postid=138">his latest blog entry</a> about being a "baker" with CakePHP, detailing some of his first forays into the CakePHP framework.
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
I've always dreaded frameworks. Ususually it takes longer to learn a framework than to actually code the project in the first place. Over the years I've checked out various frameworks and all fell short when I tried to do something that needs to be done in the real world. There's always some tradeoff that needs to be made.
</p>
<p>
Now Zend Framework will no doubt be successfull and most likely in a year from now should have a pretty good feature set but for today it looks like there is a king of the hill for PHP frameworks(for me anyway). CakePHP.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
He <a href="http://www.litfuel.net/plush/?postid=138">talks about</a> some of the major advantages that he sees for the project, including its documentation, built-in pagination support, and Active Record functionality. There was an issue with the last of them that he noticed as his code got a bit more complex - performance issues with the Active Record implementation. Outside of that, though, he only found goodness inside of <a href="http://www.cakephp.org">this cake</a>.
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 25 Jun 2006 16:39:38 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Marcus Whitney's Blog: Microsoft on PHP (podcast)]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/4959</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/4959</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In <a href="http://www.marcuswhitney.com/?p=72">this new blog entry</a>, <i>Marcus Whitney</i> talks about the <a href="http://www.phparch.com/shop_product.php?itemid=112">upcoming php|architect webcast</a> he'll be hosting interviewing two people from Microsoft - Brian Goldfarb and Joe Stagner.
<p>
<quote>
<i>
I'm pretty excited about this weeks webcast. I'll be speaking with Brian Goldfarb and Joe Stagner of Microsoft about how PHP can be used for enterprise development on the Windows platform.
<p>
I think that everyone should consider checking in and asking these guys some questions.
</i>
</quote>
<p>
He <a href="http://www.marcuswhitney.com/?p=72">also mentions</a> that Microsoft, for a long time, only saw PHP in the context of the LAMP "package" and not as a stand-alone language. Seems their outlook has changed a bit - check out <a href="http://www.phparch.com/shop_product.php?itemid=112">the webcast</a> to see just how much</a>...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2006 07:02:23 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
