<?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>Sat, 18 May 2013 23:46:15 -0500</pubDate>
    <ttl>30</ttl>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Jason Lefkowitz's Blog: The Worst Thing About PHP]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/5492</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/5492</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
In his <a href="http://www.jasonlefkowitz.net/blog1archive/2006/05/the_worst_thing.html">latest post</a>, <i>Jason Lefkowitz</i> takes on something that's praised by PHP developers and non-PHP developers alike - the documentation for the project. There's just something he finds messy about the whole business.
</p>
<p>
Really, it has more to do with the way that PHP's structured than the actual documentation. It's just a case of art imitating life.
</p>
<quote>
<i>
<p>
Now, having lots of libraries isn't necessarily bad - Java has an even more Herculean list. It only becomes a problem when you make no distinctions between them in the docs - like PHP. 
</p>
<p>
PHP just throws a huge list of libraries at you and leaves you to figure out which one you need. There's no overarching "Database" package - instead you get Postgres functions and Oracle functions and Firebird functions and MySQL functions, all sprinkled throughout the list. 
</p>
</i>
</quote>
<p>
He <a href="http://www.jasonlefkowitz.net/blog1archive/2006/05/the_worst_thing.html">also comments</a> that the entire listing is also cluttered with other functionality, things that most developers would toss aside if they came across - they just don't need them.
</p>
<p>
His point isn't without merit - there is definitely a need to reorganize things in the manual to make them a bit more "topic friendly". The documentation is already one of the most well-maintained in the Open Source community, so the content is there, maybe it's just the structure that needs to be changed.
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 14:45:05 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
