<?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>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:50:03 -0500</pubDate>
    <ttl>30</ttl>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[International PHP Magazine: Poll Question: You Did Not Know That]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6299</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6299</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
The International PHP Magazine has conducted a poll on its website over the past week, this time asking "You Did Not Know That...", asking developers which of the true statements about PHP they didn't know about.
</p>
<p>
The options this time were:
<ul>
<li>The trailing '?>' in PHP is Optional
<li>You can embed other programming languages in PHP
<li>Objects can be made to look like arrays by using Standard PHP Library
<li>require is faster than require_once
<li>Anything Less than 5.1.0 is Silly
<li>All
</ul>
There wasn't a whole lot of difference in the results of this poll, but the most all-inclusive of the list was the one selected the most - "All". Following that, was that the trailing closing PHP tag is optional, then a tie for third between the "embed other languages" and "Less than PHP 5.1.0" options.
</p>
<p>
Be sure to cast your vote in their latest poll that asks readers <a href="http://www.php-mag.net/magphpde/magphpde_news/psecom,id,26343,nodeid,5.html">that they're really looking for</a> in their frameworks.
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 14:16:19 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Adam Trachtenberg's Blog: PHP 5 + COM + Skype Help Wanted]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6257</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/6257</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
<i>Adam Trachtenberg</i> is looking for some help in the COM department, specficially in <a href="http://www.trachtenberg.com/blog/2006/09/12/php-5-com-skype-help-wanted/">using it with PHP5</a>.
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
I'm trying to use PHP 5.2 to talk to Skype via the COM extension and Skype4COM interface.
</p>
<p>
I'm using this example from the Skype Forum, but I get a COM exception of "Skype client is not installed."
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
He also points to <a href="http://forum.skype.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=59155&view=findpost&p=276292">someone else</a> with the problem, but still hasn't quite found a solution. Anyone <a href="http://www.trachtenberg.com/blog/2006/09/12/php-5-com-skype-help-wanted/">want to help</a>?
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 07:15:49 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Justin Silverton's Blog: PHP vs Perl]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/5178</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/5178</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
<i>Justin Silverton</i> has posted a <a href="http://blinduser.blogspot.com/2006/04/php-vs-perl.html">comparison</i> between PHP and Perl</a>, with the first part coming more from the PHP side comparing it to Perl and the second the opposite.
</p>
<p>
He starts off with some of the differences between the two langauges, including that PHP was made for the web, Perl was not and that PHP scripts take less overhead for the web server to run that Perl scripts as CGIs. There are also four larger topics that he looks at:
<ul>
<li>PHP has separate functions for case insensitive operations
<li>PHP has inconsistent function naming
<li>PHP has no lexical scope
<li>PHP has too many functions in the main namespace
</ul>
</p>
<p>
All but the top item (that one could be argued either way) are reasons that a Perl user might cite against using PHP. For each of the items, there's a bit of description following to give you a better idea where they're coming from.
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:24:04 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Wolfgang Drews' Blog: PHP Frameworks - to use or not to use?]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/5054</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/5054</link>
      <description><![CDATA[It seems like all of the buzz in the PHP community lately is about the proliferation of several PHP frameworks including the <a href="http://framework.zend.com">Zend Framework</a>, <a href="http://www.symfony-project.com/">Symfony</a>, and <a href="http://ez.no/products/ez_components">eZ Components</a>. In response to this surge, several developers are offering their opinions on the matter, including <a href="http://www.drews.cx/2006/03/27/php-frameworks-to-use-or-not-to-use/">Wolfgang Drews</a>, maintainer of <a href="http://www.dynamicwebpages.de">DynamicWebPages.de</a>.
<p>
<quote>
<i>
There are now so many Frameworks out there for php (just have a short look at <a href="http://dmoz.org/Computers/Programming/Languages/PHP/Scripts/Frameworks/">dmoz</a>, there are 46 listed, missing some wellknown ones like <a href="http://ez.no/products/ez_components">ezComponents</a>, <a href="http://framework.zend.com/">ZendFramework</a>, <a href="http://solarphp.com/">Solar</a>, <a href="http://www.symfony-project.com/">Symfony</a>, <a href="http://www.codeigniter.com/">Code Igniter</a>, ..., and what about <a href="http://pear.php.net/">PEAR</a>??) - but which one are you going to use? Well, i guess it is a challenging question, especially if it is now up to you to decide this for a new starting project. Probably all frameworks have some strengths and weaknesses, but how long does it take you to evaluate them? You need some faster criteria to decide, and maybe these one will help you.
</i>
</quote>
<p>
The "must have" questions <a href="http://www.drews.cx/2006/03/27/php-frameworks-to-use-or-not-to-use/">he shares</a> include:
<ul>
<li>Is the framework well documented?
<li>Is the framework backed by a well known company?
<li>Does the framework fit into your IT-landscape?
</ul>
Each is as important as the next and together they, and their answers, make for a well-rounded look at each framework.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2006 08:25:22 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Justin Siltervon's Blog:  5 Reasons not to use OSCommerce]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/4945</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/4945</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<i>Justin Silverton/i> has written up in <a href="http://blinduser.blogspot.com/2006/03/5-reasons-not-to-use-oscommerce.html">this blog post</a> the five reasons he sees not to use the popular <a href="http://www.oscommerce.com">OSCommerce E-Commerce software</a>.
<p>
He quotes from <a href="www.oscommerce.com">their site</a> where it mentions that their goal is to "continually evolve by attracting a community [...] to provide additional functionality to the already existing rich feature set."
<p>
Of the five raeasons he gives, here are a few:
<ul>
<li>difficult to integrate into an existing design
<li>admin navigation issues
<li>security
</ul>
<p>
While some of the issues her points out here are a matter of personal preference, the "security" aspect caught my eye. These days, especially with all of the talk about security in the PHP community, that should be one of the first things groups look at in their software. From his comments, OSCommerce doesn't make it very easy to implement a patch either.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 2006 07:09:38 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Greg Beaver's Blog: If you run your own PEAR channel, please watch pear-qa]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/4933</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/4933</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<i>Greg Beaver</i> has <a href="http://greg.chiaraquartet.net/archives/118-if-you-run-your-own-PEAR-channel,-please-watch-pear-qa.html">a quick reminder</a> on his blog for anyone out there running their own PEAR channels - "please watch pear-qa".
<p>
<quote>
<i>
Just a quick note to all of you PEAR channel administrators: Please take a moment to either join the pear-qa@lists.php.net mailing list, or follow php.pear.qa at news.php.net.  Why?
<p>
Every time a new release of the core PEAR package is slated, I (or whoever is in charge of the release) will post a message to the pear-qa list asking for testing of the new version 1 full week ahead of the scheduled release date.  This is the one opportunity to test for critical errors that unit tests or myself have missed.
</i>
</quote>
<p>
There's a <a href="http://greg.chiaraquartet.net/archives/118-if-you-run-your-own-PEAR-channel,-please-watch-pear-qa.html">specific instance</a> he mentions of where this happened (in 1.4.7 involving channel names with a "-") and the code was still released. Of course, once it was applied, many users were upset that their installs had just "stopped working". 
<p>
<quote>
<i>
It would be very helpful to have channel administrators take a second to try out stable versions of PEAR as they approach release.
</i>
</quote>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 2006 07:11:40 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Christian Wenz's Blog: Zend and Oracle, again]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/4844</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/4844</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<i>Christian Wenz</i> has posted <a href="http://www.hauser-wenz.de/s9y/index.php?/archives/159-Zend-and-Oracle,-again.html">this new item</a> on his blog today with a report relating to the Oracle/Zend rumors that have been floating around.
<p>
<quote>
<i>
Well, the <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2006/tc20060209_810527.htm">rumors</a> (that also made it into blogosphere, including <a href="http://www.schlitt.info/applications/blog/index.php?/archives/416-Will-Oracle-buy-Zend.html">Toby's post</a>) obviously could not be ignored by Zend any longer. Therefore, the German division of Zend just sent out an email to a couple of people officially stating that Zend is currently not negotiating a sale to Oracle.
</i>
</quote>
<p>
I suppose only time will tell on the deal, but it seems for now that the sale is not going to happen (and that there never was a sale in talks at all).]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2006 18:46:00 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
