I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework
seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have
been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features
(webservices, etc.).
Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of
professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will
become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other
frameworks such as CakePHP will die off as a result?
The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already
spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time
if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's
releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation
is STILL horrible.
I'm sure you'll get a number of responses from people familiar with
both systems, professing that CakePHP is better / smaller / faster,
whatever. I haven't used Zend, so I can't comment on that.
However, the reason I am going to stick with CakePHP is because I know
it, and trust its direction. We have already invested a couple of
years in learning CakePHP, our team is familiar with it, and it is
providing us with substantial benefits over using no framework (or the
custom "framework" we used to use). I can't remember the last time we
had a business need for a site that we couldn't solve because of
CakePHP.
So basically:
I know CakePHP
It can handle anything I want to do
It is driven by very strong developer(s), who have a proven commitment
to quality.
and that's enough for me :)
On Dec 17, 2:59 pm, Action <theactionco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework
> seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have
> been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features
> (webservices, etc.).
> Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of
> professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will
> become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other
> frameworks such as CakePHP will die off as a result?
> The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already
> spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time
> if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's
> releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation
> is STILL horrible.
I have been following CakePHP as well as Zend Framework since very early stages. At this moment what seems to be going very well for Zend is the workflow processes but it is still missing too many things for me to work with it on a project.
CakePHP on the other hand is already a fairly mature (read as "field tested") framework and it works for me NOW
At some time in future every software becomes obsolete - the question you should be asking is "Is the lifetime of the current software worth it for me?"
I once was involved with development of phplib - a set of classes which provided amongst other things sessions for php3, all us knew that php4 will have sessions but we had enough users who wanted the development to continue and it did for quite some time even after php4 was released and I am told that a some people still use some parts of the old code (I don't)...
So keep growing and keep investing time in learning new things.
That said - I don't see any *one* framework becoming an industry standard in PHP world
On 12/17/07, Action <theactionco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework > seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have > been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features > (webservices, etc.).
> Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of > professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will > become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other > frameworks such as CakePHP will die off as a result?
> The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already > spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time > if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's > releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation > is STILL horrible.
> What do you think?
-- ============================================================= Cheesecake-Photoblog: http://cheesecake-photoblog.org PHP for E-Biz: http://sanisoft.com =============================================================
> I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework
> seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have
> been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features
> (webservices, etc.).
> Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of
> professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will
> become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other
> frameworks such as CakePHP will die off as a result?
> The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already
> spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time
> if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's
> releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation
> is STILL horrible.
I think such hybridization is not really possible. The frameworks are
not developed to be compatible to each other...
If they turn out to be will be accidentaly, not intentionally.
I might be light now, but I think CakePHP user base and community is
bigger than Zend's. Zend has the only advantage to know PHP to its
core, and drive its development to whatever direction they choose.
On Dec 17, 8:52 am, RichardAtHome <richardath...@gmail.com> wrote:
> CakePHP can easily use the zend framework classes. So why not use
> both?
> From what I hear of Zend, its more a set of libraries than a
> 'framework'.
> On Dec 17, 4:59 am, Action <theactionco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework
> > seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have
> > been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features
> > (webservices, etc.).
> > Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of
> > professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will
> > become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other
> > frameworks such as CakePHP will die off as a result?
> > The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already
> > spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time
> > if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's
> > releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation
> > is STILL horrible.
I think people will choose what suits the given situation. If it's
practical, fast, and working smoothly, I will choose anything.
I will, however, choose Cake over Zend because it is open source,
free, with a fairly nice community, and this is where I feel most
comfortable (please note that I never tried Zend and am not competent
to speak of it's quality).
Uhh...you're wrong. You can just drop any of the Zend libraries into
the vendors folder.
For instsance, I used the tutorial in the bakery on Zend's Lucene
implementation to help me get it integrated into a subscription-based
product I launched.
....it's a cakePHP site & service with zend's lucene library providing
search of the documents! (the views that render the search results,
etc are still cake, they just use Zend as a component/helper)
> I think such hybridization is not really possible. The frameworks are
> not developed to be compatible to each other...
> If they turn out to be will be accidentaly, not intentionally.
> I might be light now, but I think CakePHP user base and community is
> bigger than Zend's. Zend has the only advantage to know PHP to its
> core, and drive its development to whatever direction they choose.
> On Dec 17, 8:52 am, RichardAtHome <richardath...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Another spin on the subject:
> > CakePHP can easily use the zend framework classes. So why not use
> > both?
> > From what I hear of Zend, its more a set of libraries than a
> > 'framework'.
> > On Dec 17, 4:59 am, Action <theactionco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework
> > > seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have
> > > been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features
> > > (webservices, etc.).
> > > Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of
> > > professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will
> > > become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other
> > > frameworks such as CakePHP will die off as a result?
> > > The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already
> > > spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time
> > > if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's
> > > releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation
> > > is STILL horrible.
> I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework > seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have > been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features > (webservices, etc.).
The problem with ZF is its advertised strength: "Hey look everyone at our kewl components." In my view ZF is not a framework, it's a subset of PEAR for web developers. There's no over-arching sense of where to put things. There aren't conventions and best practices. It is no more of a framework than PEAR is.
To me, ZF is the pieces you use to build a website, not the framework and guide that CakePHP is.
> Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of > professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will > become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other > frameworks such as CakePHP will die off as a result?
Yeah it'll die right out. Projects without large corporate support always die out. Like the Ron Paul campaign. Or Linux.
> The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already > spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time > if something like Zend is going to become the standard.
Have you seen a big uptake with ZF? If anything, interest in their "framework" is slowing. I won't pretend to be a technology prophet, but I see no indication of Cake going away anytime soon. Nor do I see any indication of the ZF becoming some sort of industry standard.
Frankly, I think it's misleading of Zend to advertise their project as an MVC framework. Where exactly is the Zend_Model "component"? It's like handing me a plate of veggies and selling it as meat and potatoes. They've got some cool stuff in there (the Lucene and PDF stuff I've used in my Cake projects), but it's not MVC.
> Cake's > releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation > is STILL horrible.
It's about quality, not quantity.
I'm also tiring of people crying about the docs. Right now, we have 170 completely rewritten printed pages of documentation for code that isn't even BETA. We have an article repository with thousands of community contributed articles. There are only a dozen or so documentation tickets that are active, and I have no regular contributors to the documentation creation process (outside of the CakePHP core team). Docs are in a pretty good state right now.
It seems you're just parroting what you might have heard without really investigating the facts. Cake is on the up, ZF is on the flat, and docs are better than they've ever been. It's a great time to be a CakePHP user.
I was *completely* new to the whole MVC, PHP Framework thing. Never even heard of it before.
I got CakePHP up and running in 30 mins and was able to "do stuff".
After about two months messing with CakePHP a friend recommended Zend. He was the same friend who recommended a PHP framework, so I took his advice.
After an hour (and two months prior experience) I still couldn't get the thing up and running right. So there you have it, CakePHP it is.
Bottom line, it works for what I'm doing. Maybe if I'm building the next DIGG, I may reconsider, but for write now. Cranking out small/medium sized web apps works fine and super fast in CakePHP.
On Dec 17, 2007 9:30 AM, John David Anderson (_psychic_) <
> > I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework > > seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have > > been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features > > (webservices, etc.).
> The problem with ZF is its advertised strength: "Hey look everyone at > our kewl components." In my view ZF is not a framework, it's a subset > of PEAR for web developers. There's no over-arching sense of where to > put things. There aren't conventions and best practices. It is no more > of a framework than PEAR is.
> To me, ZF is the pieces you use to build a website, not the framework > and guide that CakePHP is.
> > Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of > > professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will > > become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other > > frameworks such as CakePHP will die off as a result?
> Yeah it'll die right out. Projects without large corporate support > always die out. Like the Ron Paul campaign. Or Linux.
> > The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already > > spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time > > if something like Zend is going to become the standard.
> Have you seen a big uptake with ZF? If anything, interest in their > "framework" is slowing. I won't pretend to be a technology prophet, > but I see no indication of Cake going away anytime soon. Nor do I see > any indication of the ZF becoming some sort of industry standard.
> Frankly, I think it's misleading of Zend to advertise their project as > an MVC framework. Where exactly is the Zend_Model "component"? It's > like handing me a plate of veggies and selling it as meat and > potatoes. They've got some cool stuff in there (the Lucene and PDF > stuff I've used in my Cake projects), but it's not MVC.
> > Cake's > > releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation > > is STILL horrible.
> It's about quality, not quantity.
> I'm also tiring of people crying about the docs. Right now, we have > 170 completely rewritten printed pages of documentation for code that > isn't even BETA. We have an article repository with thousands of > community contributed articles. There are only a dozen or so > documentation tickets that are active, and I have no regular > contributors to the documentation creation process (outside of the > CakePHP core team). Docs are in a pretty good state right now.
> It seems you're just parroting what you might have heard without > really investigating the facts. Cake is on the up, ZF is on the flat, > and docs are better than they've ever been. It's a great time to be a > CakePHP user.
On Dec 17, 2007 3:30 PM, John David Anderson (_psychic_)
<psyc...@cakephp.org> wrote: > I'm also tiring of people crying about the docs. Right now, we have > 170 completely rewritten printed pages of documentation for code that > isn't even BETA.
I've been struggling with Cake and yesterday found the tempdocs for 1.2 and it was like a lightbulb - they're brilliant, even if incomplete. Unlike the dreadfully sparse manual or API, they give real examples, just like the PHP.net docs.
Unfortunately the existence of the docs is a bit of a secret. Despite having a big link to download 1.2 on the Cake homepage, there's no obvious link to the new docs on the Cake homepage, just to the old Cake manual. Sure it may not look as flashy, but if it has the info, who cares? It makes me wonder how many newbies are struggling just because they don't even know a secret new manual exists? In my view hiding the good docs away could really hurt takeup now that most people will be jumping straight to 1.2
> On Dec 17, 2007 3:30 PM, John David Anderson (_psychic_) > <psyc...@cakephp.org> wrote:
>> I'm also tiring of people crying about the docs. Right now, we have >> 170 completely rewritten printed pages of documentation for code that >> isn't even BETA.
> I've been struggling with Cake and yesterday found the tempdocs for > 1.2 and it was like a lightbulb - they're brilliant, even if > incomplete. Unlike the dreadfully sparse manual or API, they give real > examples, just like the PHP.net docs.
Comments like that are what allows me to keep working on the docs. Thanks.
Yes, it's a complete rewrite with more emphasis on the high-level and with more examples. It's incomplete, but that's not so bad for pre- beta docs. We're closing in on things though. Please contact me if you'd like to help out.
> Unfortunately the existence of the docs is a bit of a secret. Despite > having a big link to download 1.2 on the Cake homepage, there's no > obvious link to the new docs on the Cake homepage, just to the old > Cake manual. Sure it may not look as flashy, but if it has the info, > who cares? It makes me wonder how many newbies are struggling just > because they don't even know a secret new manual exists? In my view > hiding the good docs away could really hurt takeup now that most > people will be jumping straight to 1.2
True. I've added the link to the default CakePHP home.ctp - I hesitate to link to it too much because of it's temporary nature, but it's no secret (we've linked to it in announcements, etc.). Tell your friends. :)
Well if this gives you motivation, let me ditto his comments.
The validation, the binding and unbinding, the global functions (will some of these have to be removed now? I noticed a 61?? revision where all the am's where removed), the form helper....
They've all been great to me...I've printed out sections of this and these are currently my guide.
> > On Dec 17, 2007 3:30 PM, John David Anderson (_psychic_) > > <psyc...@cakephp.org> wrote:
> >> I'm also tiring of people crying about the docs. Right now, we have > >> 170 completely rewritten printed pages of documentation for code that > >> isn't even BETA.
> > I've been struggling with Cake and yesterday found the tempdocs for > > 1.2 and it was like a lightbulb - they're brilliant, even if > > incomplete. Unlike the dreadfully sparse manual or API, they give real > > examples, just like the PHP.net docs.
> Comments like that are what allows me to keep working on the docs. > Thanks.
> Yes, it's a complete rewrite with more emphasis on the high-level and > with more examples. It's incomplete, but that's not so bad for pre- > beta docs. We're closing in on things though. Please contact me if > you'd like to help out.
> > Unfortunately the existence of the docs is a bit of a secret. Despite > > having a big link to download 1.2 on the Cake homepage, there's no > > obvious link to the new docs on the Cake homepage, just to the old > > Cake manual. Sure it may not look as flashy, but if it has the info, > > who cares? It makes me wonder how many newbies are struggling just > > because they don't even know a secret new manual exists? In my view > > hiding the good docs away could really hurt takeup now that most > > people will be jumping straight to 1.2
> True. I've added the link to the default CakePHP home.ctp - I hesitate > to link to it too much because of it's temporary nature, but it's no > secret (we've linked to it in announcements, etc.). Tell your > friends. :)
On 12月17日, 下午11時30分, "John David Anderson (_psychic_)"
<psyc...@cakephp.org> wrote:
> On Dec 16, 2007, at 9:59 PM, Action wrote:
> The problem with ZF is its advertised strength: "Hey look everyone at
> our kewl components." In my view ZF is not a framework, it's a subset
> of PEAR for web developers. There's no over-arching sense of where to
> put things. There aren't conventions and best practices. It is no more
> of a framework than PEAR is.
> To me, ZF is the pieces you use to build a website, not the framework
> and guide that CakePHP is.
> -- John
I think ZF is one flexible framework which you could use it in Cake
style or in PEAR style. I would love to hear core developers intend to
include some resources from ZF(like the java part, because I still
couldn't find better solutions to generate reports without problems in
Chinese.) and ezComponents (like the work-flow engine). :)
On Dec 17, 2007 8:17 PM, kiang <kia...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think ZF is one flexible framework which you could use it in Cake > style or in PEAR style. I would love to hear core developers intend to > include some resources from ZF(like the java part, because I still > couldn't find better solutions to generate reports without problems in > Chinese.) and ezComponents (like the work-flow engine). :)
Why would those components be included in CakePHP when you can easily incorporate them from ZF and ezComponents (although I have not seen an example of doing this) into CakePHP already?
On 12月18日, 上午10時57分, "Chris Hartjes" <chart...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 17, 2007 8:17 PM, kiang <kia...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think ZF is one flexible framework which you could use it in Cake
> > style or in PEAR style. I would love to hear core developers intend to
> > include some resources from ZF(like the java part, because I still
> > couldn't find better solutions to generate reports without problems in
> > Chinese.) and ezComponents (like the work-flow engine). :)
> Why would those components be included in CakePHP when you can easily
> incorporate them from ZF and ezComponents (although I have not seen an
> example of doing this) into CakePHP already?
> --
> Chris Hartjes
Once part (or all) of ZF or ezComponents be included, then core
developers of CakePHP could extend the functionality base on them
instead of having some hours/days to create similar components. What
about baking a work-flow? What about some great behaviors to work with
Lucene? I knew I could do everything by hands. But the reason I use
CakePHP is similar with why I think it's great the core of CakePHP
could be extended based on some other great staff.
That's personal thinking. It's not required for me to keep being a fan
of CakePHP. :)
> Uhh...you're wrong. You can just drop any of the Zend libraries into
> the vendors folder.
> For instsance, I used the tutorial in the bakery on Zend's Lucene
> implementation to help me get it integrated into a subscription-based
> product I launched.
> ....it's a cakePHP site & service with zend's lucene library providing
> search of the documents! (the views that render the search results,
> etc are still cake, they just use Zend as a component/helper)
Finding those tempdocs were a large part of why we chose to look more
into Cake than a couple other frameworks while we were looking over
PHP frameworks recently at my work. One of the big knocks on Cake was
the documentation in place until I linked that work in progress :)
On Dec 17, 5:12 pm, "John David Anderson (_psychic_)"
> I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework
> seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have
> been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features
> (webservices, etc.).
> Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of
> professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will
> become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other
> frameworks such as CakePHP will die off as a result?
> The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already
> spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time
> if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's
> releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation
> is STILL horrible.
What calls itself the Zend Framework is, I agree, a library, a
collection of classes. One of those classes - Zend_Controller - is a
library that acts like an MVC framework. Everything else is/should be
totally pluggable with the rest of the world. And so I think that
cakePHP is a superior MVC framework, but could use a hand from some
Zend components.
--Jacob
On Dec 19 2007, 4:38 am, Mika <mmihajlo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I doubt you're going to get a fair (or rather unbiased) answer posting
> in thecakephpforum. Maybe post in a more general php forum?
> Mika
> On Dec 17, 6:59 am, Action <theactionco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework
> > seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have
> > been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features
> > (webservices, etc.).
> > Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of
> > professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will
> > become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other
> > frameworks such asCakePHPwill die off as a result?
> > The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already
> > spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time
> > if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's
> > releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation
> > is STILL horrible.
Cake and CI, introduced me to MVC. And i am loving it. Although, HABTM is still hard for me.
I been using PEAR for 2 straight years, until i finally decided to try Cake. I got tired of a glue Framework and wanted something more different. Cake will totally help me to learn on Object Oriented programming and be more familiar with it on PHP and ASP.NET :)
I am a total newbie, enjoying Cake. Been using Cake for 2 slow months now. Just this week, i was able to kinda understand small things on HABTM.
Louie
On Jan 4, 2008 11:08 AM, superuser2 <jacob.superus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What calls itself the Zend Framework is, I agree, a library, a > collection of classes. One of those classes - Zend_Controller - is a > library that acts like an MVC framework. Everything else is/should be > totally pluggable with the rest of the world. And so I think that > cakePHP is a superior MVC framework, but could use a hand from some > Zend components.
> --Jacob
> On Dec 19 2007, 4:38 am, Mika <mmihajlo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I doubt you're going to get a fair (or rather unbiased) answer posting > > in thecakephpforum. Maybe post in a more general php forum?
> > Mika
> > On Dec 17, 6:59 am, Action <theactionco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend Framework > > > seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have > > > been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features > > > (webservices, etc.).
> > > Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of > > > professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will > > > become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other > > > frameworks such asCakePHPwill die off as a result?
> > > The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already > > > spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste time > > > if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's > > > releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's documentation > > > is STILL horrible.
> Cake is a full-stack framework and ZF is a glue.
> Cake and CI, introduced me to MVC. And i am loving it. Although, HABTM is > still hard for me.
> I been using PEAR for 2 straight years, until i finally decided to try > Cake. I got tired of a glue Framework and wanted something more different. > Cake will totally help me to learn on Object Oriented programming and be > more familiar with it on PHP and ASP.NET :)
> I am a total newbie, enjoying Cake. Been using Cake for 2 slow months now. > Just this week, i was able to kinda understand small things on HABTM.
> Louie
> On Jan 4, 2008 11:08 AM, superuser2 <jacob.superus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What calls itself the Zend Framework is, I agree, a library, a > > collection of classes. One of those classes - Zend_Controller - is a > > library that acts like an MVC framework. Everything else is/should be > > totally pluggable with the rest of the world. And so I think that > > cakePHP is a superior MVC framework, but could use a hand from some > > Zend components.
> > --Jacob
> > On Dec 19 2007, 4:38 am, Mika <mmihajlo...@gmail.com > wrote: > > > I doubt you're going to get a fair (or rather unbiased) answer posting > > > in thecakephpforum. Maybe post in a more general php forum?
> > > Mika
> > > On Dec 17, 6:59 am, Action <theactionco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend > > Framework > > > > seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have
> > > > been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features > > > > (webservices, etc.).
> > > > Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of > > > > professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will > > > > become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other > > > > frameworks such asCakePHPwill die off as a result?
> > > > The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already > > > > spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste > > time > > > > if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's > > > > releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's > > documentation > > > > is STILL horrible.
> BTW, on the documentation side. Maybe a *total newbie guide* on HABTM will
> also be helpful for users having a hard time with it.
> - Saving on 2 tables.
> - belongsTo, but saving only to 1 table or field.
> Something like that.
> Louie
> On Jan 4, 2008 2:50 PM, Louie Miranda <lmira...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Cake is a full-stack framework and ZF is a glue.
> > Cake and CI, introduced me to MVC. And i am loving it. Although, HABTM is
> > still hard for me.
> > I been using PEAR for 2 straight years, until i finally decided to try
> > Cake. I got tired of a glue Framework and wanted something more different.
> > Cake will totally help me to learn on Object Oriented programming and be
> > more familiar with it on PHP and ASP.NET :)
> > I am a total newbie, enjoying Cake. Been using Cake for 2 slow months now.
> > Just this week, i was able to kinda understand small things on HABTM.
> > Louie
> > On Jan 4, 2008 11:08 AM, superuser2 <jacob.superus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > What calls itself the Zend Framework is, I agree, a library, a
> > > collection of classes. One of those classes - Zend_Controller - is a
> > > library that acts like an MVC framework. Everything else is/should be
> > > totally pluggable with the rest of the world. And so I think that
> > > cakePHP is a superior MVC framework, but could use a hand from some
> > > Zend components.
> > > --Jacob
> > > On Dec 19 2007, 4:38 am, Mika <mmihajlo...@gmail.com > wrote:
> > > > I doubt you're going to get a fair (or rather unbiased) answer posting
> > > > in thecakephpforum. Maybe post in a more general php forum?
> > > > Mika
> > > > On Dec 17, 6:59 am, Action <theactionco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I've always used Cake as my primary framework, but the Zend
> > > Framework
> > > > > seems to be shaping up nicely. Most of its published criticisms have
> > > > > been dealt with since 1.0 and it has some very impressive features
> > > > > (webservices, etc.).
> > > > > Given the fact that it's "Zend" and that there's an entire team of
> > > > > professional developers behind it, do you think this framework will
> > > > > become the industry standard for PHP? Also, do you think other
> > > > > frameworks such asCakePHPwill die off as a result?
> > > > > The reason I ask is because I question Cake's future. I've already
> > > > > spent a lot of time on this framework, but I don't want to waste
> > > time
> > > > > if something like Zend is going to become the standard. Cake's
> > > > > releases are far more infrequent than Zend's and Cake's
> > > documentation
> > > > > is STILL horrible.
