PHP Annotations Are a Horrible Idea

Re:PHP Annotations Are a Horrible Idea by ludovicurbain on Wednesday October 17, 2012 @09:07AM (#4664197)

That article misses the point:

PHP OO is a HORRIBLE IDEA. if you're doing OO PHP, shoot your other foot right now and go learn PHP before using it java-style.

Why is it that every time somebody on HN explains that a technology is not suitable for a use case, it gets downvoted by fans of said technology ?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:PHP Annotations Are a Horrible Idea by theunraveler on Wednesday October 17, 2012 @09:35AM (#4664304)

Why is PHP OO a horrible idea?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:PHP Annotations Are a Horrible Idea by ludovicurbain on Wednesday October 17, 2012 @09:41AM (#4664331)

PHP OO is broken in many ways (of which you can find a list in the blog post "php a fractal of bad design"

PHP is naturally (due to it's C libs) non-OO and will thus only implement OO "that" far.

Lastly, OO is not a silver bullet and is best used only in front-end, and languages that were designed with it in mind.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:PHP Annotations Are a Horrible Idea by shakesbeard on Wednesday October 17, 2012 @10:06AM (#4664460)

Well, OOP in PHP seems to work rather well for thousands of large projects out in the wild - making your argument invalid.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:PHP Annotations Are a Horrible Idea by ludovicurbain on Wednesday October 17, 2012 @10:48AM (#4664665)

Well, smoking cigarettes seems to work rather well for millions of successful people out in the wild - making your argument invalid.

It IS possible to make "business good" software in brainfuck, that's just not a reason to call it "not broken".

See, this is about science, logic, and whether or not a feature is properly supported by a language, not about whether or not somebody managed to build and sell a solution while using that feature.

[ Parent | on HN ]