Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Recommended Reading List for PHP

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the i'm-told-that's-a-popular-drug dept.

128

Steve writes "IBM developerWorks has put together a PHP recommended reading list. It provides resources for developers and admins adopting PHP and tackling advanced topics such as building extensions and writing secure code. There's also a list of books and blogs for keeping up with changes to the language itself."

cancel ×

128 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Forgot one (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937338)

They forgot the most important article on PHP! What it is:

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/PHP [uncyclopedia.org]

Re:Forgot one (1)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937485)

Uncyclopedia is so inaccurate!

Try the Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] instead.

Re:Forgot one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937566)

Are you kidding? Wikipedia is full of all kinds of misinformation! Haven't you read the Uncyclopedia warning about them? It's their mission to deceive you with information made up by fanbois!

Re:Forgot one (2, Funny)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937693)

Wow [wikipedia.org] ! Thanks for the heads-up [wikipedia.org] !

Why? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937648)

Why do people mod "Uncyclopedia" links funny? They're never funny. They're just stupid.

Re:Forgot one (1)

HaDAk (913691) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938623)

omg. uncyclopedia is my new god!

Re:Forgot one (1)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938944)

Wow, whoever wrote that article doesn't really understand what makes a joke funny at all. Every line is essentially the same thing: start with a tangentially related, but untrue, factish statement about PHP, then wildly shift gears in a contradictory clause in non-sensical fashion. How wacky!

It makes me long to watch Son of the Mask again. I won't laugh at that either, but I won't expect to, so it won't be nearly as disappointing.

Jobs section in the newspaper (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937359)

open source = homelessness

Re:Jobs section in the newspaper (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937581)

open source = homelessness

No, no... You mean "Open Sores."

Queue anti-PHP jokes... (1, Funny)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937361)

Queue anti-PHP jokes...

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (4, Funny)

Jason Earl (1894) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937399)

If PHP developers could read they would be using Python...

Thanks, I will be here all week...

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (3, Funny)

homebrewmike (709361) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937665)

And if Python developers could code, they would be using Java.

Troll status, here I come!

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (2)

Senzei (791599) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937860)

And if Python developers wanted to drown in xml, they would be using Java.

There, fixed that type for you.

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (4, Funny)

caffeination (947825) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937928)

There, fixed that typo for you.

There, fixed that typo for you.

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (1)

Pneuma ROCKS (906002) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938202)

There, fixed that typo for you.
There, fixed that typo for you.
There.

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (1)

killjoe (766577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938435)

If people knew lisp there would be no need for XML.

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (1)

miyako (632510) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938801)

And if Java programmers understood Pointers they would be using C++

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14939914)

And if C++ programmers understood why pointer arithmetic is bad, they wouldn't be so stupid.

FOREIGNER (1)

caffeination (947825) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937768)

If Python developers had { and } keys they'd be using PHP!

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (1)

jtorkbob (885054) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937913)

You missed one:

http://www.perl.org/ [perl.org]

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14938310)

@PHP_Recommended_Reading = ("Learning Perl", "Programming Perl", "Mastering Regular Expressions", "Programming the Perl DBI", "Advanced Perl Programming");

Re:Queue anti-PHP jokes... (4, Insightful)

forkazoo (138186) | more than 8 years ago | (#14939881)

I tried to add my joke to the queue, but do to a weak implimentation of object orientation and inconsistency, I was just left befuddled as to whether I needed to AddJokeToQueue, joke2queue, add_joke, etc. So, I gave up and just put my joke on rails... /me ducks...

Seriously, I love PHP, but I think that it is designed to require having the docs handy... :)

FYI Sandra Dee (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937362)

Girl + Midget = Gidget.

Ah, yes (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937375)

PHP: When you're too fucking retarded to learn a real programming language.
See also: MS-BASIC, DOS Batch.

Re:Ah, yes (4, Insightful)

lymond01 (314120) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937420)

Meh. For web-based applications on a small to medium level, PHP is the way to go. You can say it's just a scripting language and therefore not a "real" programming language if your definition of "real" does not include a language with defined syntax, for loops, variables, arrays, system calls, objects, classes, etc.

But then what would you call it? An egg? No...that's taken by those round things chickens lay. I've no idea really. I'll just go with programming language and leave the modifiers out.

Re:Ah, yes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14938033)

Nah, if there's any kind of business logic going on RoR is the way to go.

PHP is a decent templating language for mostly static pages, tho.

Another PHP slogan (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937422)

PHP: 10 million newbies can't be wrong.

Re:Ah, yes (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937449)

Really? Let's compare them now.

Write a program to copy a file. Choose whatever language you like. I'll write one as well, in either DOS batch or basic. Let's see who gets the program done first.

Every language has a scope of usefulness. While the usefulness of basic and dos batch are quite limited, they are quite good for writing a programs (scripts) to perform simple tasks.

Of course, with a neck so long that your head is in the clouds, you could stick your head up your ass further than anyone else can.

PHP 5 Power Programming (Gutmans) (5, Interesting)

pestilence669 (823950) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937401)

This book was Slashdotted a few months ago. It's written and endorsed by members of the core PHP team. It's the most accurate language resource I've come across. It covers the PHP language, while I've found that other books tend to offer cookie-cutter "recipes" for common scenarios (code snippets). Sadly, its mention of interfaces is a bit sparse and it pre-dates PHP 5.1's PDO. Nevertheless, I still find it very relevant for anyone doing OOP with PHP. There are one or two gems not found in the online documentation.

NOTE: It's better to have some PHP programming experience before reading.

ISBN: 0-13-147149-X

ISBN-13 is upon us! (2, Informative)

XanC (644172) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937424)

978-0-13-147149-8

Re:ISBN-13 is upon us! (1)

pestilence669 (823950) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937609)

my bad

How about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937415)

People criticize PHP because code written in it is messy and stuff. I think it is mostly because writing PHP code is so easy that most of the web designers and hobbyists write it.

How about compulsory reading of a C++ or Java OO book, even before you know what "var $myVar" is.

Re:How about this (2, Insightful)

temojen (678985) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937513)

How about compulsory reading of a C++ or Java OO book, even before you know what "var $myVar" is.
I've used C, C++, Java, JavaScript, PHP, Perl, Scheme, Prolog, Cobol, plPGSQL, x86 Assembler, VAX Assembler, 68hc11 Assembler, and TCL, and I don't know what language you'd use the statement "var $myVar" in.

Re:How about this (1)

caffeination (947825) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937649)

I've just tested it on my local copy of my site, in php, and it seems to work similarly to 'exit'.

Re:How about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937741)

"I've used C, C++, Java, JavaScript, PHP, Perl, Scheme, Prolog, Cobol, plPGSQL, x86 Assembler, VAX Assembler, 68hc11 Assembler, and TCL, and I don't know what language you'd use the statement "var $myVar""

I am the op, and you prove my point precisely. You said you have developed using PHP, and you don't know what var $myVar is? That is because you do not know OO PHP and people like you should read the effing OO programming and follow that in PHP so that your messay habits do not end up being blamed on the language.

Does this makes any sense to you

Class MyClass extends SuperClass
{
      var $id;
      var $anotherId;

      function MyClass()
      {
            # a constructor

      }
}

This is called a class definition. and var $myVar is a veriable of that class.

Re:How about this (1)

temojen (678985) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937945)

Oh yeah, I've been editing other people's non-OO PHP for a few months. It's been a while since I made classes. The code I've been editing has business logic and presentation badly mixed, and editing it involved wadeing through reams of nested tables.

never code while angry (1)

caffeination (947825) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937960)

Now you see how stupid you are for coding while angry? You forgot to put anything in your function! That's what I call a messy habit!

Re:How about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14938489)

Note: The PHP 4 method of declaring a variable with the var keyword is no longer valid for PHP 5 objects. For compatibility a variable declared in php will be assumed with public visibility, and a E_STRICT warning will be issued.

source: php manual [php.net]

so on the one hand, for php4 oop it's needed to know what var does, but it's not as important as knowing reference handling (because of autocloning). but on the other, it's more important to write php5 scripts using E_STRICT (to get warnings when using undefined member variables or legacy features) and not to bother about attic statements such as var.

until php5, people complained about crappy php oop features and now, you get angry because someone does not know the hardly usable and therefore obsoleted way? tztz

Re:How about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937747)

PHP 4.x uses it for class variables.

Re:How about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14938027)

I've used C, C++, Java, JavaScript, PHP, Perl, Scheme, Prolog, Cobol, plPGSQL, x86 Assembler, VAX Assembler, 68hc11 Assembler, and TCL...

Wow dude you are so cool. You must get all the ladies.....

Re:How about this (1)

Hosiah (849792) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938196)

Wow dude you are so cool. You must get all the ladies.....

Sweetheart, 20 years ago he would have been bragging. *Now* he's just trying to KEEP UP. (Notes lack of Python or Ruby) and he's losing!

Re:How about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14938747)

#!/usr/bin/perl

sub var { print @_, "\n" }

$myVar = 'hello, world';

var $myVar

Agile Web Development (-1, Flamebait)

daVinci1980 (73174) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937472)

I suggest Agile Web Development with Rails. [amazon.com]

It fascinates me that people still deal with PHP at all.

PS: If you're stuck with PHP, I seriously feel for you.

Re:Agile Web Development (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937848)

It's too bad you're such a Jack Ass.

Re:Agile Web Development (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14938091)

+1, insightful

Useful article++... Am I lost? (3, Funny)

Duncan3 (10537) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937479)

Not a dupe...
Actually useful...
First post wasn't about a Beowulf cluster or Soviet Russia...

What happened to Slashdot???

My faith will be restored if this article is duped within 24 hours.

Re:Useful article++... Am I lost? (1)

caffeination (947825) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937661)

Iam Slasdot edditer Rob Malda, and this is the longast day of my life! BEEP BEEP BEEP VEEEP.

PHP, the web standard (1)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937553)

I'll have to check out those books. I'm ashamed to say that I don't know as much about PHP as I should. While I was busy trying to decipher Open Source Perl code (to learn from) the web standardised on PHP, and I know next to nothing about it!
I just hope there's an emacs mode for PHP, I'd hate to have to go back to using VIM to code.

Re:PHP, the web standard (4, Insightful)

Senzei (791599) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937894)

The web hasn't standardised on PHP, there is an emacs mode for it, and you will probably come to hate it.

It has always seemed like the bash of web programming, except uglier and slightly more difficult to use. It works, but if you push it too hard or the wrong way it feels like you are trying to make a mud sculpture.

Re:PHP, the web standard (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14939658)

Mud sculpture is close, but I think another brown substance might be more accurate.

Re:PHP, the web standard (3, Interesting)

edwdig (47888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14940041)

If you think PHP is ugly, try looking at ColdFusion. Same basic idea as PHP, but you get to write you code in HTML style syntax. You also get Fortran style operators (gte instead of >=, lt instead of <, etc) Damn near impossible to quickly glance at large block of code and figure out what's going on. The code doesn't stand out from the HTML, and you've got a ton of keywords due to all the information being passed HTML attribute style.

Fun stuff like this...

<cfloop index="i" from="0" to="10" step="1">
    <cfif i mod 2 is 1>
        <cfoutput>#i# is odd</cfoutput>
    <cfelse>
        <cfoutput>#i# is even</cfoutput>
    </cfif>
</cfloop>

You also get some really odd language decisions. For example, when they first added support for functions there were no return values. To work around this, you had a special local variable called "caller" which was a structure containing the local variables of the previous scope. They eventually fixed this, but PHP's language problems don't look so bad compared to that.

Re:PHP, the web standard (1)

Hosiah (849792) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938104)

I'm ashamed to say that I don't know as much about PHP as I should.

I have learned just last week that the best way to learn PHP is to suddenly become a webmaster hosted on a Linux server using various installed content-management tools like b2evolution or WordPress for blogging and Coppermine for image gallery. You will simply be *thrust* into PHP with no second option. In fact, my host has something like 50 tools available to use and I think only 3 of them aren't PHP.

Call it geek-fatigue, but the thing that's starting to bug me is that no matter how many languages you learn, IT'S NEVER ENOUGH. I know/have worked in something like 20 languages in my lifetime, and still, every time I try to tackle some new task, all I knew before is comepletely useless. No, I have to learn a special language just for *that* job. And I suppose by the end of this year, styles will change and they'll decend a new language from AJAX or somedamnthing and I'll *never* have a use for PHP again! When did "programming language" come to == "Kleenex"?

software engineering for internet applications (1)

tjr (908724) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937625)

Why all of the PHP postings? (-1, Offtopic)

amightywind (691887) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937629)

This is the 3rd PHP posting in the last 3 days. PHP is a pretty niche language with little theoretical power. Everything it does can be accomplished as easily by other means (JSP, Perl...). How about paying more attention to 'bread and butter' languages like C, C++, and Scheme?

Re:Why all of the PHP postings? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937659)

Ah yes, But seriously, How often is there any articles worth submitting to slashdot on other languages?

Re:Why all of the PHP postings? (2, Funny)

Tim Browse (9263) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937671)

PHP is a pretty niche language with little theoretical power.

Thanks - I've only just stopped laughing.

Are you here all week?

Re:Why all of the PHP postings? (1)

caffeination (947825) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937725)

Not once the moderators are finished with him.

Re:Why all of the PHP postings? (1)

messju (32126) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937804)

Hmm, why is this a laugh?
The theoretical power of php is really low. It's more its practical power that made it popular.
And although it is a pretty huge niche where php fits it stays a niche by definition.
(Don't get me wrong, I do professional php from time to time).

mmm... theoretical power (1)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938230)

we only use 10% of the theoretical power in any programming language.

PHP might be the gedit of programming languages. No, gedit can't do everything emacs does, but it's always there when you need it and damned if it can't show you a bunch of text and let you edit. You can even search/replace

Security is *advanced*!? (1, Insightful)

porneL (674499) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937634)

If security is threated as advanced topic in PHP, no wonder this language has such lousy reputation.

Re:Security is *advanced*!? (1)

almostobsolete (867353) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937650)

I noticed that as well, pretty much sums up the general PHP attitude to secuirty...

Re:Security is *advanced*!? (1)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937757)

If you consider security in a server-side application something even a beginner can handle, then I question the security of your code.

Re:Security is *advanced*!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14939930)

If you can't handle security, you aren't even a beginner, you're simply unqualified to do the work (without someone looking over your shoulder).

Re:Security is *advanced*!? (1)

bturnip (761620) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937759)

What intro to (insert my-favorite-super-leet-flavor-here) language talks about security first? Really, that is great that security is old hat to all the seasoned pros and was obviously the first thing they must have covered right after "Hello, world!". In TFA, on the first page at the very top:
Recommended PHP reading list
Level: Introductory
So, c'mon, lighten up, you know? PHP is such an easy target. Go bash the Perl or Python geeks. What about Ada? Not enough folks bashing Ada...
ps- not a spelling snob, but I couldn't quite tell if that was supposed to be "If security is treated as [an] advanced topic..." or "If security is threatened as [an] advanced topic..."

Nooo!!!! (4, Insightful)

drew (2081) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937709)

And this is why I hate web programming and web programming languages:

It provides resources for developers and admins adopting PHP and tackling advanced topics such as building extensions and writing secure code.

Why is this considered an advanced topic? Security should be the first thing anyone writing software for the web learns. And web programing languages need to make it easy to write secure code by default. *Sigh*

Re:Nooo!!!! (2, Interesting)

caffeination (947825) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937869)

Out of honest curiosity, is that how perl is? I'm a fledgling programmer myself, using PHP. There's a lot of talk about it being insecure, and not being a True Programming Nerd, I have no real idea why.

This itself raises the issue that if a language is too easy to write securely by default, people starting out in it won't learn to think about security when they code, which is a short term vs long term thing. The phrase "too secure" does sound a little moronic though...

For the record, my code is incredibly paranoid. I'm probably not very representative though, being a much-less-new security conscious Linux user.

Re:Nooo!!!! (4, Funny)

Hosiah (849792) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938159)

is that how perl is

Perl: Take every programming language you know now. Mix them all together. That's Perl. No, not the functionality, just the syntax.

Re:Nooo!!!! (3, Informative)

Craig Maloney (1104) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938595)

The reason people find PHP so insecure is because you can plop a script practically anywhere on the server, and have it run. So, if one of the scripts allows someone to upload somewhere where they shouldn't, BAM, you're compromised.

I've found this out first-hand with a few PHP scripts I've run. It's amazingly easy to set up, but it's also a discipline in itself to ensure it keeps crackers out.

Re:Nooo!!!! (1)

dodobh (65811) | more than 8 years ago | (#14940200)

PHP used to have horrible defaults. This has improved, but a lot of application programmers still require old style settings.

The core language is huge. PHP lacks namespaces, making all variables global.

PHP is _extremely_ easy for newbie programmers to mess with. This has practically made it the visual basic of the Linux/Unix world.

On the other hand, Perl went through this evolution a few years ago. (The lack of use strict and use warnings by default is _still_ a known bug). Perl has a taint mode, where the programmer is required to validate all input to the program. Perl supports namespaces. The use strict and use warnings pramgas help in avoiding silly mistakes, like typos.

Perl doesn't make it hard to write insecure code. But writing secure code is a lot easier in Perl than in PHP, because the language supports those features.

(You could say similar things about Ruby, or Python, or Java).

Re:Nooo!!!! (1)

skillet-thief (622320) | more than 8 years ago | (#14940544)

I am more or less an intermediate PHP hacker. Most of my experience is in Perl and mod_perl.

Right now, what I find the most frustrating about PHP is the embedded model. It seems that you have to jump through a lot of hoops to work around that. Maybe once you get used to jumping through those hoops it is okay, but (for me anyway) it seems like I am working against the language when I want to abstract webpages away from their files, for example.

It seems to me that this is one of those areas where the easy-access part (templating built right into the way you code) starts making it harder to do more complicated things.

Re:Nooo!!!! (1)

elp (45629) | more than 8 years ago | (#14940294)

PHP catches a lot of flack because it is by far the most popular language out there for building websites which offends the crowd who want work with a language only the ubergeeks can use.

The thing is that a clueless newbie can be productive in less than 2 weeks with PHP (even though looking at his code will make your eyes bleed). While for more experienced programmers its very easy to use things like the object features in PHP5 combined with template tools like smarty [php.net] and db libraries like ADODB [sourceforge.net] to create stable, maintainable and fast sites. For most small to medium business owners it's a really good choice because the openness helps keep down development costs and if one developer doesn't deliver its easy to find another who can.

When it comes to security the real truth is that it doesn't matter what language you use, if you don't check the user input, you WILL be sorry. Every 3 months or so I'll have a customer upload a formail.pl script from the 1990s and I'll end up having to clean up the mess once the spammers start exploiting it. Most of the security problems with PHP tend to always occur with the same small group of popular packages (phpbb, postnuke, etc.) written by people only worried about the functionality not about the security)

Re:Nooo!!!! (1)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938964)

Why is this considered an advanced topic?

Indeed. The one thing that makes the absurdity of this point of view apparent is when you point out that "secure code" is a synonym for "correct code". If you write bug-free code, then you've basically eliminated security holes. That reduces "security is an advanced topic" to "writing code that isn't full of bugs is an advanced topic", which isn't exactly defensible.

Just learn from the examples. (2, Insightful)

caluml (551744) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937743)

Only thing I've ever needed to read to learn PHP is fr.php.net [php.net] . (Because the UK mirror is slower.)

Templating systems (2, Informative)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937778)

This one's an ABSOLUTELY MUST-READ for those who don't know what template engines are:

http://www.sitepoint.com/article/beyond-template-e ngine [sitepoint.com]

Re:Templating systems (1)

Cl1mh4224rd (265427) | more than 8 years ago | (#14939239)

Bleh. What's wrong with XML and XSL? Seriously... The developer generates the XML document structure, then passes it through the XSLT processor, applying an XSL stylesheet created by the web designer. Standards all the way...

Re:Templating systems (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#14939344)

Bleh. What's wrong with XML and XSL?

It's not supported in PHP4. Sure, there are the extensions, but they're NOT installed by default in common server configs, so you'd have to do it by hand, and that's SLOOOOOOWWW.

5 good PHP sites (5, Informative)

Anthony Boyd (242971) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937784)

Their list is great -- I'll be reading some of those articles for weeks before I get through them all. I'm especially interested in the 7 security blunders article. Nice!

But they did leave off a lot of sites that are useful. Here are a few:

  • PHP Resource Index [resourceindex.com] - a few thousand scripts for downloading, most free, all PHP.
  • PHP Builder Forums [phpbuilder.com] -- the PHP Builder site is pretty useful all by itself, but in the forums there are thousands of people willing to answer your PHP questions.
  • PHP Freaks [phpfreaks.com] -- one of the guys behind this site wrote a great PHP book. The site is excellent.
  • ADOdb Database Abstraction Layer [sourceforge.net] -- okay, okay, this isn't really a site, so much as a product. But still, it's a very efficient DBAL, and it should be used for every database query.

Anyone want to pitch in with some more? I'm sure there are some very useful sites that I've completely missed (and which the IBM site missed, too).

PHP Rocks in time spent! (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937835)

PHP is a powerfull language not only for the web, but for general purpose programming. Please, experienced C and C++ programmers do a favor to yourselfs and give it a try, testing algorithms can be done in a very short little time, in contrast to other languages.
It's a breeze in the ocean!

http://www.codingheaven.net/ [codingheaven.net] http://www.codingheaven.net/ [codingheaven.net]

Re:PHP Rocks in time spent! (1)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 8 years ago | (#14939722)

Hehehehe. Oh my.

Some mods failed to catch the subtle sarcasm of the parent post, eh? :)

Schlossnagle's "Advanced PHP Programming" (3, Interesting)

MattW (97290) | more than 8 years ago | (#14937941)

I'm glad to see that at the top of the list. I haven't read all those php books, but I am a very experienced developer in the language, and that book is fabulous. It manages to cover many topics, and with astounding clarity and insight. Definitely a master work on the topic.

I'd suggest these: (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14937982)

Re:I'd suggest these: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14938795)

get rid of Celko's book and replace with:

Database in Depth, by C. J. Date

which in roughly 200 pages explains the relational model, the underlying model of all data management (yes, including objects and XML), rather than any product (such as an SQL DBMS).

The first book a PHP programmer should get is... (0, Offtopic)

5n3ak3rp1mp (305814) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938139)

this one [amazon.com] , and then this one [pragmaticprogrammer.com] . ;)

/flame-off

//kept pushing my host to install PHP5 for months, before I got on the train

Required reading (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14938607)

If you are considering going into any PHP development at all, this is really required reading [rubyonrails.org] .

One useful article (1)

pnot (96038) | more than 8 years ago | (#14938608)

... on when and when not to use PHP: Experiences of Using PHP in Large Websites [ukuug.org] (Aaron Crane, UKUUG Linux Conference 2002).

Re:One useful article (1)

lbft (950835) | more than 8 years ago | (#14940602)

Anyone who's used PHP recently will recognise many inaccuracies and weak points made within that article - from the superglobals, to the Apache php_flag/php_value directives, to the fact that most of the "problems" mentioned are rarely used, fixable by using the recommended php.ini configuration, or by actually showing some self-discipline and not using bad practices (I mean, hey, people wouldn't blame C for someone #define-ing themself into oblivion, would they? No, they'd blame the programmer.)

I'm not saying that PHP is the best solution for every situation, but rather that most of the common criticisms of it are based on false assumptions, shallow understanding of the language and outdated knowledge (the article the parent links to quotes the PHP 2 manual, for goodness' sake! PHP 5 left beta in July 2004!)

You forgot one (1)

onlyjoking (536550) | more than 8 years ago | (#14939121)

'Programming Perl' by Larry Wall

Sooo hate to say it.... (-1, Redundant)

ericdfields (638772) | more than 8 years ago | (#14939372)

...anyone else catching this stuff on digg hours before it appears on slashdot.....?

Re:Sooo hate to say it.... (1)

Hosiah (849792) | more than 8 years ago | (#14939397)

but did everybody on Digg think PHP is a new hip-hop group?

Re:Sooo hate to say it.... (1)

ericdfields (638772) | more than 8 years ago | (#14939742)

no... but they do consider the possibilities that new technologies -- 'innovations' some may say -- pose a challenge to the status quo, no matter how geeky that quo may be.

sorry to be off-topic but i think this a matter that we dear /.ers need to consider...

Re:Sooo hate to say it.... (1)

Hosiah (849792) | more than 8 years ago | (#14940298)

Oh, all right, sounds like you're getting all serious on me. What pray tell, need we consider that causes such grave tones? *Waving firmly goodbye to the topic for another post*

Re:Sooo hate to say it.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14939522)

if you're reading both digg and slashdot, and often enough to know how long the lag is, then you really have too much time on your hands.

Go do something useful...
...or anything at all!

Addition to Recommended Reading List for PHP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14939581)

A Confederacy of Dunces [wikipedia.org] ?

Sorry, it was just too easy...

Most important link about PHP (0, Offtopic)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 8 years ago | (#14939667)

is this [tnx.nl] one.

I'm not trying to troll, but if you do need a scripting language for more than a "Personal Home Page" then you're essentially better off using Perl, Python or Ruby.

(Just for the record, I'm telling this while having advanced knowledge in PHP, Perl and Python and intermediate in Ruby)

My recommendations for a PHP reading list (0, Flamebait)

Crazen (615089) | more than 8 years ago | (#14939859)

If you're building a personal home page, then look at the other posts for recommendations. If you're building something that other people will have to maintain, and is supposed to generate a significiant amount of income, or is dependent on it, read anything by Scott Meyers And then: Head First Java, 2nd Ed. C++ How to Program (4th Edition)

Re:My recommendations for a PHP reading list (1)

Crazen (615089) | more than 8 years ago | (#14940249)

Objections to Ruby, Perl, insert scripting language here: weak typing and no compile step

What to read about PHP? Easy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14940206)

Nothing. Just avoid it like the plague!

Hey, nobody mentioned symfony so far! (1)

cprior (844370) | more than 8 years ago | (#14940623)

http://www.symfony-project.com/ "symfony is an open-source PHP5 web framework "professional web tools for lazy folks *

/me is a bit too tired to write something witty about it here, you might want to judge a quote from the dev yourself:

fabpot: "I'm not very strict with design patterns... I try to be pragmatic and to get things done quickly. That said, I know there is a lot of problems with this way of doing things and I try to correct them with new releases. symfony is a moving target..." (01/30/2006 08:28 in #symfony)

I like it for a pragmatic, down-to-earth approach:
Lotsa form_tag opening helper functions, but you close with

And if you ever thought open-source was not well documented, you are in for a surprise!

*) under discussion

PHP - Because everyone else is doing it. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14940727)

I have actual products and such written in PHP that I sell. I would consider myself "advanced" in php programming. (I've been at it a number of years)

PHP is very easy, but compared to perl (or even JSP..) it is terrible. The only reason to learn it is if you are planning on reselling scripts or working (as in paid..) for others. Working with it is a pain. It's horrible when it comes time to move from host to host because it has "settings" (a language with an .ini file is NOT a language)

PHP5 is a step in the right direction, however, it's been a couple YEARS now and most ISP's still don't support it (or if they do, it's via a CGI mode which is slow and buggy)

Unfortunately, people searching for web applications generally look at PHP directories. There is this sense that perl is outdated.

People like PHP because it doesn't involve setting permissions. It's common for designers to "bank on" a web server configuration working properly. This is shown by the way nearly all PHP "applications" have database passwords embedded directly into the PHP code, IN WEB SPACE. Try to design securely and your customers get confused by the notion of "out of web space" (secure design means passwords are NEVER stored in a web accessible file, even if it does end in .php)

The "language" was not designed, it just sort of "happened". If you need extensions (and you most certainly WILL need extensions, such as XML..) don't bank on it. You can look forward to hours of fun chasing them down, working around host limitations, etc..

If you're doing something "for fun"... pick another language. PHP is a cruel joke.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>