quote:

---

Sent the source code to CVS on SourceForge.
Win3DBoAEditor/source

---

quote:

---

Sent the source code to CVS on SourceForge.
Win3DBoAEditor/source

---

quote:

---

Originally written by The Dog And Pony Show:

[b]Keep in mind here I'm speaking of PHP 4 and below; PHP 5 is not yet deployed enough to be worth discussing.

PHP is a poorly designed language. It has a very weak module system, and almost all of the standard library is loaded by default.
> This is true. But is the speed decrease significant?

It takes the atrocious and ugly syntax of Perl (universal sigils, etc.) without the actual useful bits (primitive regexes).
> I presume by 'sigil' you mean the variable prefix ($). I think it helps clarify the code and eases readability.
> Primative regexes- I can only assume you're talking about something like
> $a = /regexp/
> $a->match($wtf);
> I haven't taken the time to learn Perl regexes -
> I usually use POSIX.

In general, you can't choose what parts of the standard library get loaded or not at runtime. Oh, and I haven't seen any evidence of namespaces at all.
> The point is that *why* you would need
> namespaces in a web-based environment. PHP is a
> sort of 'Web-dev RAD system that yet manages to
> not be evil like most RAD systems'. In PHP5
> various OO functions were introduced, but I
> recall reading an article that generally
> said "Why the hell would you need this in web
> -dev anyway?".

Until recently, the default behavior was to automatically load CGI arguments into global variables, which is of course absurdly foolish.
> I agree that it was rediculous. They have fixed this nastiness. Why dwell on their past mistakes?

PHP encourages the mixing of data and code. Some people might consider its HTML embedding to be an advantage; I consider it to be a major flaw. Any good code would eschew such obfuscation, and most significant PHP projects do.
> The flexibility of PHP (particularly how if(){ ?> conditional HTML ?php } is valid syntax) is
> partially to blame for HTML embedding. But providing the developer is careful and responsible enough this can be avoided. I'm sure there are tons of *Perl* programs out there which are crappily written.
[?php is due to UBB's crappy HTML filtering.]

Its object model has been historically either nonexistent or hackish. This may not be interesting to procedural programmers, but it is a major flaw in my eyes.
> Are you complaining about how they implemented OO in the C sourcecode or what?

It depends heavily on pragmas and other global configuration settings, due to the aforementioned lack of granularity.
> Again, what the hell are you blabbering about.

PHP is, in general, an ugly, hackish language that shows its original purpose as a glorified SSI system in every wrinkle and crack.
> Really? Provide examples.
http://www.bitstorm.org/edwin/en/php-sucks/[/URL][/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally written by ARRR-enax:

And yet PHP is incredibly popular and used way more often than Ruby is.

So the market decrees you are wrong, Djur. :D (Not that I don't disagree--PHP is rather hackish--but it's good for what it does. I just pity the people who don't know any other language.)

---

quote:

---

Originally written by Walker, Texas Corpse:

>What's the difference? You can make standalone
>applications with Javascript; it's just a case
>of getting the right libraries together.
Why would you want to, though, when there's something more powerful like C around.

>You mean pointer arithmetic? Please, it's 2004.
>Good practice uses as little pointer arithmetic
>as possible. With today's computers, mucking
>with unterminated raw data is foolish and
>atavistic.
Can you hook onto ("take over") other (Win32) applications in Java?
Come to think of it, can you do that in Linux variants.

>It isn't.
That clarification was unneccesary, since I already knew it wasn't. I just don't like to say 'isn't' because then my loss of credibility would suffer more damage than if I'd just said 'doubt'.

>ECMAscript is the official scripting language o
>the ECMA standards body, more or less.
>Javascript is a superset of ECMAscript that
>includes the DOM and other extra functionality.
Thank you for that clarification.

>Um, Javascript has real string manipulation. It
>has arrays. It is a complete, capable
>programming language, and BoA is not.
>Seriously. As far as languages go, Javascript
>far outstrips Avernumscript.
Oh, right. I don't really know Avernumscript.

quote:

---

Wikipedia disagrees and so do I. My definition is that a programming language is a language used to develop standalone applications, while a scripting language is used as an extension language for a pre-existing application. An example is Lua in Baldur's Gate -- that's a scripting language. When used in browsers, Javascript is also a scripting language. When used standalone, it is a programming language.

---

That's a good definition. I usually use my instinct when telling between scripting and programming so I wasn't really that good at describing the differences.

---

quote:

---

HTML is a markup language. It is entirely static and possesses no facility for conditional logic; thus, it is not a programming language. Javascript, on the other hand, is.

---

quote:

---

(Yes, I know, there are many valid uses of JavaScript. But I haven't found one I can either do without or do better in something else.)

---

quote:

---

Javascript is a real boon, unless you WANT to do a POST for every single local state change.

---

quote:

---

2) Let me see if I understand your logic. Because PHP isn't supported on free sites...Javascript is better? That makes no sense.

---

quote:

---

3) Java beats the tar out of Javascript and, though more difficult to use, has the advantage of being useful in more than a scant few respects.

---

quote:

---

Java is very easy to code. Since I have never had occasion to write in C++ (nor learn how to), I wouldn't be able to compare that. However, I doubt that C++ can be a lot simpler than what I'm doing now.

---

quote:

---

As more than three quarters of my current sites are on free providers without PHP support... yes, by my logic Javascript is a lot better. There are people around who choose to spend their meager resources on other things than web domains.

---

quote:

---

Just for you guys to know. . .

The "Java" choice includes Java variants. OK? (JavaScript, etc.)

---

quote:

---

But you can do more. It's like BoE versus BoA: BoE/JavaScript are easy and "clean," but not as powerful.

---