Re: [WebDNA] WebDNA vs. php war ;-)
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2010
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 104817
interpreted = N
texte = Or, the one that irks me the most... if (isnull($_GET['variable'])) { $newname=$_POST['variable']; } else { $newname=$_GET[['variable']; } versus [text show=f]varname=[variable][/text] How about: $value) { echo $key . " - " . $value . "
"; } foreach ($_POST as $key=>$value) { echo $key . " - " . $value . "
"; } ?> versus [formvariables] [name] - [value]
[/formvariables] Dan Strong wrote: > Provide me with these accurate comparisons and I'll do a 2nd > "corrected" vid. Note: the original vid cannot be "replaced:" on youtube. > > -Dan Strong > http://www.DanStrong.com > > > On 2/19/2010 12:10 PM, Donovan Brooke wrote: >> Paul Willis wrote: >>> At the risk of being chased off the list some commentators do have a >>> point. >>> >>> A lot of the PHP example code is padded out unnecessarily. Why are >>> the tags included on separate lines, why isn't there a >>> similar at the top of each example? Not to >>> mention that many setups work with short PHP tags >>> >>> You don't have to set a variable and then echo it, you can just >>> print it straight out etc., for instance... >>> >>> >> $browser = $_SERVER['HTTP_USER_AGENT']; >>> print "$browser"; >>> ?> >>> >>> could be... >>> >>> >>> >>> There are also various (unnecessary) lines of error checking code >>> included in the PHP samples. >>> >>> The thing is WebNDA is simpler to code than PHP we don't have to >>> 'cheat' to prove it. >>> >>> is still longer and messier >>> than [browsername] >>> >>> Paul >> >> >> I agree 100% Paul (though I love the general presentation of Dan's >> vid!). Comparisons have to be accurate else you lose "clout". Many of >> the examples being put out there, including many of them on >> webdna.us, could be presented much more accurately and WebDNA will >> still "win" the majority of them. You are right. >> >> Donovan >> >> >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list
. > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > old archives: http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/ > Bug Reporting: > http://forum.webdna.us/eucabb.html?page=topics&category=288 > >
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Or, the one that irks me the most... if (isnull($_GET['variable'])) { $newname=$_POST['variable']; } else { $newname=$_GET[['variable']; } versus [text show=f]varname=[variable][/text] How about: $value) { echo $key . " - " . $value . "
"; } foreach ($_POST as $key=>$value) { echo $key . " - " . $value . "
"; } ?> versus [formvariables] [name] - [value]
[/formvariables] Dan Strong wrote: > Provide me with these accurate comparisons and I'll do a 2nd > "corrected" vid. Note: the original vid cannot be "replaced:" on youtube. > > -Dan Strong > http://www.DanStrong.com > > > On 2/19/2010 12:10 PM, Donovan Brooke wrote: >> Paul Willis wrote: >>> At the risk of being chased off the list some commentators do have a >>> point. >>> >>> A lot of the PHP example code is padded out unnecessarily. Why are >>> the tags included on separate lines, why isn't there a >>> similar at the top of each example? Not to >>> mention that many setups work with short PHP tags >>> >>> You don't have to set a variable and then echo it, you can just >>> print it straight out etc., for instance... >>> >>> >> $browser = $_SERVER['HTTP_USER_AGENT']; >>> print "$browser"; >>> ?> >>> >>> could be... >>> >>> >>> >>> There are also various (unnecessary) lines of error checking code >>> included in the PHP samples. >>> >>> The thing is WebNDA is simpler to code than PHP we don't have to >>> 'cheat' to prove it. >>> >>> is still longer and messier >>> than [browsername] >>> >>> Paul >> >> >> I agree 100% Paul (though I love the general presentation of Dan's >> vid!). Comparisons have to be accurate else you lose "clout". Many of >> the examples being put out there, including many of them on >> webdna.us, could be presented much more accurately and WebDNA will >> still "win" the majority of them. You are right. >> >> Donovan >> >> >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > old archives: http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/ > Bug Reporting: > http://forum.webdna.us/eucabb.html?page=topics&category=288 > >
Matthew Bohne
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
Fw: Linux w/ apache (2000)
Using Applescript to process WebCatalog functions (1998)
EditPlus 2 WebDNA cliptext (2002)
Bug Report, maybe (1997)
Thanks for tips, more quest (1997)
WebCat2 as a chat server? (1997)
.htaccess to make WebDNA serve HTML (2007)
attachment (2000)
multi-paragraph fields (1997)
Processing stops (2006)
Include binary files in template/XML (SOLVED/Request (2004)
WebCatalog 2.0 b 15 mac (1997)
DomainList (2005)
WebCat2.0b15-to many nested [xx] tags (1997)
PCS Emailer's role ? (1997)
2.0 Info (1997)
Problems with [Applescript] (1997)
Banner DNA (1997)
WebCatalog 4.0 Users that want to talk to the Media.... (2000)
japanese characters (1997)