[UPHPU] Rails vs PHP

[Joshua Simpson]

On 3/26/07, cole at colejoplin.com <cole at colejoplin.com> wrote:
>
>
> Poorly designed for what? That's like saying a sledge hammer is a
> poorly designed hammer. Even the best designed languages cannot save
> you from bad programmers or usage. If it works, is appropriate for the
> job it was supposed to do, and you were paid well for it -- call it a
> win.


And I agree (to an extent;  I still think there is an inherent way to judge
the design of a language whether it's useful or not, or whether you consider
it the right tool for the job).  But this doesn't address the issues I
raised:  that PHP, as a very specific, narrowly focused language, shouldn't
be compared to a language like Ruby.  It should be compared just as it was:
to a framework in said language.

>> "If we want, we can have a 'Code Off'." "Be warned. BASIC
> >> outperformed perl, php, python and ruby".
>
> Can I pick Assembly?


Sure, but I'll pick either C or Python (with Psyco) and will outperform
you.  The assembly code generated by modern compilers outmatches nearly any
handwritten assembly most people can come up with.  It's a common fallacy
nowadays that human generated asm is superior in speed for most things;
that used to be the case, but now that compilers have evolved to the point
where they are today,  it's pointless to write in assembly for most
performance reasons.

dw


-- 
-
http://stderr.ws/
"Some pseudo-insightful quote here." - Some Guy