This is quite interesting,
PHP is so success, but Pear as an offical package, seems to be a
little bit weak.
i have developed PHP for many years, and can easily do my job without
Pear, e.g. I use Smarty, PHPmailer, adodb etc.
However, In the old day when I use perl, cpan is a must for perl
developer.
But now even zend framework didn't use Pear, what's wrong with that in
fact?
howa wrote:
> This is quite interesting,
>
> PHP is so success, but Pear as an offical package, seems to be a
> little bit weak.
>
> i have developed PHP for many years, and can easily do my job without
> Pear, e.g. I use Smarty, PHPmailer, adodb etc.
>
> However, In the old day when I use perl, cpan is a must for perl
> developer.
>
> But now even zend framework didn't use Pear, what's wrong with that in
> fact?
>
>
Absolutely nothing. Like all packages, PEAR has its uses, but it's not
useful in all circumstances.
Personally, I don't use Smarty or adodb in PHP. And I don't use
PHPMailer for eimple emails.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
"Jerry Stuckle"
news:7bedndnLo_VjJrHanZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> howa wrote:
>> This is quite interesting,
>>
>> PHP is so success, but Pear as an offical package, seems to be a
>> little bit weak.
>>
>> i have developed PHP for many years, and can easily do my job without
>> Pear, e.g. I use Smarty, PHPmailer, adodb etc.
>>
>> However, In the old day when I use perl, cpan is a must for perl
>> developer.
>>
>> But now even zend framework didn't use Pear, what's wrong with that in
>> fact?
>
> Absolutely nothing. Like all packages, PEAR has its uses, but it's not
> useful in all circumstances.
>
> Personally, I don't use Smarty or adodb in PHP. And I don't use
> PHPMailer for eimple emails.
Ditto.
I did one project in which I *seriously* wanted to make it PEAR-centric.
I wanted it to be a selling point that it capitalized on the "prior art"
existing in PEAR.
I couldn't do it.
I'm not a great programmer - although I've been at it a good long while.
So maybe a better programmer would have done better with it.
But not for me.
What I did take away from the experience was exposure to the PEAR
development/distribution system.
It's tight - like SourceForge - which is waaaaaay better.
What it *is* good for is newbie or SOHO programmers who need to develop
complex projects quickly, but who don't really know jack about programming.
PEAR is training wheels for PHP programming.
Here's an article I wrote for CNET about PEAR:
"Installing PEAR on a Shared Web Host"
http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-22_11-5163311.html
On 11 4 , 2 40 , "Sanders Kaufman"
> What it *is* good for is newbie or SOHO programmers who need to develop
> complex projects quickly, but who don't really know jack about programming.
> PEAR is training wheels for PHP programming.
This may be true a few years ago, now we have a sort of frameworks,
cakephp, zend framework etc, Pear is too loosely coupled to be a base
for a complex project.
The worst is: most popular packages did not use Pear (smarty,
phpmailer, etc)
However, this is not true for Perl, i.e. I didn't ever use a package
which is not from CPAN.
..oO(howa)
>This may be true a few years ago, now we have a sort of frameworks,
>cakephp, zend framework etc, Pear is too loosely coupled to be a base
>for a complex project.
>
>The worst is: most popular packages did not use Pear (smarty,
>phpmailer, etc)
For me the two main reasons why I don't use PEAR are:
1) Most (all?) scripts are written for PHP 4.
2) Many of them are not written as clean as I want them, some even throw
notices on a fully error-aware system (E_ALL|E_STRICT).
I clearly prefer my own scripts with only few exceptions (phpmailer for
example, but even in this case I had to put wrapper classes around it).
Micha