Php – the wrong way gas leak explosion

#########

The KISS principle, which is an acronym for “Keep It Simple, Stupid”, is an extremely wise and good principle that is generally viewed by experienced people as very good advice to follow. But even this great principle becomes a danger to a project if it is taken to the extreme. There is such a thing as “too simple” resulting in a lack of needed functionality.

This trend has emerged and become popular not because it in any way improves the result of the developing process, or because it is the right thing to do from a technology and architectural point of view. This trend has become popular because some of the developers of frameworks have managed to sweep away the masses with their polemic against programming from the ground up with stanzas like “Don’t re-invent the wheel!” and “Don’t do it yourself, others are more skillful than you”.

• A framework is not just a collection of reusable code: you cannot simply take a piece of code from the framework and integrate it into your own project. A framework is a system that helps you build software, but at the same time it forces you to work within the limitations and restrictions of the framework itself. The framework itself has lot of interdependent functionality. One piece cannot work without the other.

When you use a framework in PHP you add a layer of abstraction on top of yet another layer of abstraction, one that was already in place for you to use to begin with. gas emoji The added layer of abstraction that the framework provides may simply serve to organize your code into a pre-fixed set of patterns, or it may add even more complexity by intertwining hundreds or even thousands of classes and methods into a nightmare of dependencies, either way you’re adding layers of complexity to your code that isn’t needed!

Some companies began listening to the hype about PHP frameworks and they started their next projects using one of these popular general purpose frameworks only to end up in a disaster. Not only did they discover that the general purpose framework was really bad at solving their very specific need, but it was also extremely slow in doing so. It was impossible to scale and as a result they started ripping the framework apart in a desperate attempt to pull out all those things they really didn’t need.

In software engineering, a design pattern is a reusable solution to a commonly occurring problem in software design. A design pattern is not a finished design that can be transformed directly into code. It is a description or an idea for how to solve a problem that can be used in many different situations. la gasolina cancion Object-oriented design patterns typically show relationships and interactions between classes or objects, without specifying the final application classes or objects that are involved.

When I see patterns in my programs, I consider it a sign of trouble. The shape of a program should reflect only the problem it needs to solve. Any other regularity in the code is a sign, to me at least, that I’m using abstractions that aren’t powerful enough – often that I’m generating by hand the expansions of some macro that I need to write.

I think patterns started off as generally recognized best solutions for common problems. But now that they have been around for a while and we have experienced applications being made ten times more complicated than they need to be because people try to cram in all the patterns that they have read about (“my application is well architected, because it is loaded to the gills with patterns.”) my impression of the value of the pattern has shifted a bit.

Abstraction is powerful. What I’m really allergic to, and what I had a reaction to in the ’90s, was all the CORBA, COM, DCOM, object-oriented nonsense. Every startup of the day had some crazy thing that would take 200.000 method calls to start up and print “Hello world”. That’s a travesty! You don’t want to be a programmer associated with that sort of thing.

In the past, before the advent of object-oriented programming, around the end of the fifties, much software was developed using programming languages that emphasized unstructured programming, sometimes referred to as first- and second-generation languages. Unstructured programming (or non-structured programming) is historically the earliest programming paradigm. It was heavily criticized for producing “spaghetti” code.

Later, procedural programming was derived from structured programming. gas in babies at night Procedural programming is based upon the concept of “procedure call”. A “procedure call” is just another name for a “function call”. Procedures are also known as routines, subroutines or methods. A procedure simply contain a series of computational steps to be carried out. Any given procedure might be called at any point during a programs execution, including by other procedures or itself.

Objects can reference each other and by such a reference the methods (functions) inside can “communicate” with each other. Objects can also “inherit” methods from other objects thereby extending such, this is called “inheritance”. electricity magnetism It is a way to reuse code and allow independent extensions of the software via public classes and interfaces. The relationships of objects give rise to a hierarchy. Inheritance was invented in 1967 for the programming language Simula 67.

Object-oriented programming is about organizing code in another way than before. It is an extension of procedural programming and it is about hiding data (encapsulation) and avoiding a global scope. It is about extending functions by “borrowing” their blueprints without actually affecting the original code (inheritance). And it is about overriding functions without affecting the original code (polymorphism).

Some of the largest and most successful codebases in world are codebases that has been developed by hundreds of people who have never even met each other, codebases developed without the use of any kind of framework, codebases done entirely in a procedural programming language without the use of anything but the procedural paradigm, and they wouldn’t dream of doing it differently.

Sure, there exists such a thing as horrible code, code that perhaps wasn’t designed from the onset, or code that perhaps has outgrown itself many times but the client didn’t want to deal with a re-write, code that’s so bad you cannot make heads or tail of it any longer, but no kind of framework would have prevented this situation. This is often the natural growth process of a program. Eventually any kind of framework would have been torn to pieces anyway.

And sure there exists horrible spagetti code, but nobody produces horrible spagetti code on purpose. Sometimes this is a result of lack of experience, often times it’s the clients fault because they change the specifications several times in the middle of development, either way in both cases, even if a framework was used, the result would still be spaghetti code, and no matter how much of the object-oriented paradigm was used, the result would still be spaghetti code.

The idea behind the group is for project representatives to talk about the commonalities between our projects and find ways we can work together. Our main audience is each other, but we’re very aware that the rest of the PHP community is watching. If other folks want to adopt what we’re doing they are welcome to do so, but that is not the aim. Nobody in the group wants to tell you, as a programmer, how to build your application.

However, when we view the work of several members of the group, we can clearly see that the objective is quite contrary to the above statement. electricity in costa rica These members work tirelessly in an attempt to make PHP-FIG become an accepted “PHP standards group”, which also was the original name of the group. They do this by classifying the work of the PHP-FIG as “Modern PHP” in their books, on their websites, blog-posts, forums, etc., and by classifying other ways as backwards.

Secure coding is the practice of writing programs that are resistant to attack by malicious or mischievous people or other programs. Secure coding helps protect data from theft or corruption. In addition, an insecure program can provide access for an attacker to take control of a server or a user’s identity, resulting in anything from a denial of service to a single user to the compromise of secrets, loss of service, or damage to the systems of thousands of users.

• Web application security is an essential component of any successful project, whether open source PHP applications, web services such as straight through processing, or proprietary business web sites. Hosters (rightly) shun insecure code, and users shun insecure services that lead to fraud. The aim of this Development Guide is to allow businesses, developers, designers and solution architects to produce secure web applications. If done from the earliest stages, secure applications cost about the same to develop as insecure applications, but are far more cost effective in the long run.

• Refactoring is about improving the design of existing code. It is the process of changing a software system in such a way that it does not alter the external behavior of the code, yet improves its internal structure. With refactoring you can even take a bad design and rework it into a good one. electricity and magnetism ppt This book offers a thorough discussion of the principles of refactoring, including where to spot opportunities for refactoring, and how to set up the required tests. There is also a catalog of more than 40 proven refactorings with details as to when and why to use the refactoring, step by step instructions for implementing it, and an example illustrating how it works. The book is written using Java as its principle language, but the ideas are applicable to any OO language.

• The choice of a programming language is one of the most important factors that influence the ultimate quality of a software system. Unfortunately, too many programmers have poor linguistic skills: they are passionately in love with their “native” language, but are not able to analyze language constraints. “Understanding Programming Languages” is written for the purpose of explaining what alternatives are available to the language designer; how language constructs should be used in terms of safety and readability; how language constructs are implemented and which ones can be efficiently complied; and what is the role of language in expressing and enforcing abstractions.