Has anyone tried other web frameworks other than in php

[cs.punk]

I've recently considered learning other frameworks/platforms and I'm curious to know if perhaps someone has tried any other web frameworks (Django/ASP.net/Ruby on rails) and how you would compare them to PHP?

 

I'm currently learning Django (in python) and so far it seems sufficiently capable as well as being 'easy to use' compared with PHP, the whole data flow seems a bit 'messy' for now but I'm sure that's just due to my recent introduction to it.

 

Cheers.

 

 

[trq]

Python is an awesome language. If you have the time to invest, Django is meant to be a great framework as well.

 

Ruby (and Rails) are also really popular at the moment and there is a massive community behind it.

 

Have you looked at node.js ? It's a bit different but getting more and more popular. Not exactly something I would build an entire site with though. You might also take a look at some of the client side frameworks. While jQuery is still really popular there are better (IMO) frameworks around. Backbone.js being one I would like to spend more time with.

[Hall of Famer]

Well I read some articles that claim Python is easier to learn than PHP as a server-side programming language(and of course, both are much easier than Ruby). I dont quite understand this though, as I find PHP easier and making more sense even before I got started as a programmer.

[trq]

I'm not sure I would consider Ruby more difficult than Python. Then again though, once you know one language, others are easier to pickup.

 

PHP is however the easiest of the three. Hence, so many newbs are building sites without really knowing anything about what they are actually doing.

[Hall of Famer]

I'm not sure I would consider Ruby more difficult than Python. Then again though, once you know one language, others are easier to pickup.

 

PHP is however the easiest of the three. Hence, so many newbs are building sites without really knowing anything about what they are actually doing.

 

Yeah thats true, PHP makes it possible for amateurs to start off. The fact that PHP does not encourage a preferable coding convention is a problem for upstart sites going big, as the coders will eventually realize that their scripts are impossible to maintain. Would be better if PHP encourages coding in OOP, and proper design patterns.

[xyph]

It has little to do with encouraging. The developers of PHP do encourage good code.

 

It has more to do with backwards-compatibility, and allowing loosely-typed variables. IMO, this makes sense for a web-based programming language - having to specify type for all incoming data would get old.

[KevinM1]

It has little to do with encouraging. The developers of PHP do encourage good code.

 

It has more to do with backwards-compatibility, and allowing loosely-typed variables. IMO, this makes sense for a web-based programming language - having to specify type for all incoming data would get old.

 

Yup.  That's one of the reasons why C# added the 'var' keyword.  It's syntactical sugar that forces the compiler to infer type based on the rvalue of an assignment.  It's awesome, as you get static typing under the hood (compiler errors/warnings if you do something dumb) but it reads a lot like non-horrible JavaScript. 

 

Something like:

 

var articles = _repo.GetAll();

 

Is far better to read/write than:

 

IQueryable<Article> articles = _repo.GetAll();

[xyph]

Just to add to this, ASP is a hybrid client-side/server-side, if you wanted to try something like that out.

 

Some people love it, others can't stand it.

 

Personally, I like direct control over client-side scripting if only because behaviour can be different between major browsers. I kind of prefer the separation. I can understand the potential simplicity of combining them, though.

[KevinM1]

Just to add to this, ASP is a hybrid client-side/server-side, if you wanted to try something like that out.

 

Some people love it, others can't stand it.

 

Personally, I like direct control over client-side scripting if only because behaviour can be different between major browsers. I kind of prefer the separation. I can understand the potential simplicity of combining them, though.

 

You're describing ASP.NET webforms which sucks.  ASP.NET MVC is pure server side, and is pretty good, aside from the Microsoft bloat.  It's not as to-the-point as something like Symfony, but it gets the job done.  Client side stuff is left up to the developer's discretion, although it ships wiith jQuery.  It's really just a C# or VB (developer's choice) MVC framework.

[xyph]

Just to add to this, ASP is a hybrid client-side/server-side, if you wanted to try something like that out.

 

Some people love it, others can't stand it.

 

Personally, I like direct control over client-side scripting if only because behaviour can be different between major browsers. I kind of prefer the separation. I can understand the potential simplicity of combining them, though.

 

You're describing ASP.NET webforms which sucks.  ASP.NET MVC is pure server side, and is pretty good, aside from the Microsoft bloat.  It's not as to-the-point as something like Symfony, but it gets the job done.  Client side stuff is left up to the developer's discretion, although it ships wiith jQuery.  It's really just a C# or VB (developer's choice) MVC framework.

 

I'd imagine with just about any accepted, major language, most 'stuff' is left up to the developer's discretion. I was simply saying ASP has it built in.

 

There's also ASP.NET Web Pages as well.

 

I think I added that reply to the wrong thread though *scratches head*

[cs.punk]

Just to add to this, ASP is a hybrid client-side/server-side, if you wanted to try something like that out.

 

Some people love it, others can't stand it.

 

Personally, I like direct control over client-side scripting if only because behaviour can be different between major browsers. I kind of prefer the separation. I can understand the potential simplicity of combining them, though.

 

You're describing ASP.NET webforms which sucks.  ASP.NET MVC is pure server side, and is pretty good, aside from the Microsoft bloat.  It's not as to-the-point as something like Symfony, but it gets the job done.  Client side stuff is left up to the developer's discretion, although it ships wiith jQuery.  It's really just a C# or VB (developer's choice) MVC framework.

 

I really like C#.NET. Though I really want to stay on the open source side of things however. I've heard of Castle MonoRail, though I doubt it's gonna be that useful for employment/etc as its not as popular.

 

Things on my wishlist to try out: Scala (compiles to the JVM) + Play framework (I'm really looking forward to this, heard some great things about it from a colleague) , Ruby on Rails and another 'big' PHP framework like Yii/Zend... Mmmmmmm so little time

 

I don't see that huge of an advantage of one platform to another. But I find it's great fun to learn things, and to see how some 'good parts' of a framework are implemented.

[Nyphrex]

I'm only really "confident" with PHP, but yes, on my wishlist for learning are Python/Django, Ruby/Rails, Scala, Clojure, and perhaps even Lua... but not all of them are web frameworks aren't they ;P