Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  Messages 1 - 25 of 61 - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)   Newer >
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
José Lorenzo  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 5 2012, 10:36 pm
From: José Lorenzo <jose....@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 19:36:03 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Thurs, Jul 5 2012 10:36 pm
Subject: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

Since its creation, more than 7 years ago, CakePHP has grown with a life of
its own. Its main goal has always been to empower developers with tools
that are both easy to learn and use, leverage great libraries requiring low
documentation and low dependencies too. We've had several big releases
along these years and an ever growing community. Being one of the most
popular frameworks out there and probably the first one (!) we have also
gotten a lot of criticism from the developer community in general. We have,
though, accepted it and learnt from our mistakes to keep building the best
PHP framework there is.

CakePHP is known for having a very slow pace of adopting new stuff and it
has served very well to its community. Back when we were doing version 2.0
we decided to hold on version 5.2 of PHP for multiple reasons and despite
it didn't let us innovate as much as we wished to, it was an excellent
choice given the general environment regarding hosting solutions and
general adoption of PHP 5.3. A look back into the past reminded us that we
were big innovators in PHP, bringing features to developers that few dreamt
possible to do in this language. Now, it's time to look ahead in future and
decide on staying in our comfort zone or take back our leading position as
innovators.

So it is with great excitement that we announce we are putting our our
efforts in bringing you the next major release of CakePHP. Version 3.0 will
leverage the new features in PHP 5.4 and will include an important change
in our models and database system. CakePHP 3.0 will not be ready less than
6 or 8 months and we reckon that, given the rise of cheap cloud hosting
solutions and upcoming release of new operating system versions, there is
no better time to jump on the most current stable version of PHP.

As you may already know, PHP 5.4 offers awesome features that would
introduce useful new concepts and interesting solutions to old problems.
Closure binding, traits, multibyte support are tools we see of great
usefulness for properly implemented advanced framework features we've had
in mind for a long time. Also new syntax sugar added to the language will
make it more pleasant to write both small and complex applications with the
framework and a always welcomed free performance increase.

We have a young but already well defined road map for what we want to
accomplish in next release and you are invited to contribute and suggest
what's next:

   - Drop support for 5.2.x and support 5.4+ only
   - Add proper namespaces for all classes. This will make it easier to
   reuse classes outside CakePHP and to use external libraries and finally no
   chances of collisions between your app classes and core ones.
   - Use traits were possible and makes sense
   - Improve bootstrapping process to allow more developer control and
   better performance
   - Model layer rewrite:
      - Models to return objects from queries
      - Datamapper-like paradigm
      - Richer query API
      - Support for any database type
      - Support for more database drivers both PDO and native
   - Improve Router:
      - Make it faster
      - Remove named parameters
      - Add support for named routes
      - Smarter router prefixes
      - Shorter url syntax

As you may imagine most of the time will be spent or rewriting the model
layer, but it will also be one of the most powerful features CakePHP 3.0
will have. It's new architecture based on PHP 5.4 capabilities will offer
an easier and more powerful set of tools to build web applications in no
time.

If you are already as excited as we are this all this new stuff coming, you
definitely should meet us on next CakeFest <http://cakefest.org/> we'll be
talking about the future of CakePHP and hacking our way through to bring
you a dev release as soon as possible. Wouldn't it be lovely to attend to
awesome talks, workshops and also be part of the group deciding initial
architecture for next major version of the framework? Make sure you book
your tickets before we run out of them!

We're always looking for different people having a vision on software
development, are you interested in helping out? There is no better time to
start sending patches and become one of the core team!


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Ilie  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 6 2012, 12:17 am
From: Ilie <ilie.pan...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 21:17:10 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 12:17 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

Why the removal of named parameters in the Router? They are quite useful to
me and the Paginator uses them to keep track of page.

What would be used instead?


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Dr. Tarique Sani  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 6 2012, 2:49 am
From: "Dr. Tarique Sani" <tariques...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 12:19:40 +0530
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 2:49 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Ilie <ilie.pan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why the removal of named parameters in the Router? They are quite useful to
> me and the Paginator uses them to keep track of page.

> What would be used instead?

Guess named routes and smarter prefixes in combo will probably work the same

Just a speculation

T

--
=============================================================
PHP for E-Biz: http://sanisoft.com
=============================================================


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Kazik  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 6 2012, 6:33 am
From: Kazik <kaz...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 03:33:10 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 6:33 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

On Friday, July 6, 2012 4:36:03 AM UTC+2, José Lorenzo wrote:

>    - Model layer rewrite:
>       - Models to return objects from queries
>       - Datamapper-like paradigm
>       - Richer query API
>       - Support for any database type
>       - Support for more database drivers both PDO and native

> The new model layer will be an exciting feature. But it also looks like it

is going to be very different from CakePHP 2.

Is there going to be an update path for CakePHP 2 apps to CakePHP 3?

k


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
tigr  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 6 2012, 6:42 am
From: tigr <alb...@tigr.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 03:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 6:42 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

Hi!

First of all, big kudos to the developers of CakePHP. It is an excellent,
well thought out and well engineered framework. It does indeed look very
traditional and conservative and that is a Good Thing(tm). That's why I see
with horror the mention of moving to the objects returned by models from
queries. Would you leave them alone, please? We work in a data-centric
environment here and there is nothing better than associative arrays to do
that. Please, leave data alone and better improve the handling of data
arrays where the effects of various calls are not obvious. That will be a
much better deal. I do not expect that many people selected CakePHP in the
hope that it would move to object-oriented data. There are other frameworks
for that.

Thank you.
Albert aka Tigr


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Marsson C.  
View profile  
 More options Jul 6 2012, 9:17 am
From: "Marsson C." <marss...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 09:17:18 -0400
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 9:17 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

Does it mean Cake 3.0´s Model will return objects instead of arrays ?


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Andy Gale  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 6 2012, 9:19 am
From: Andy Gale <a...@salgo.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:19:30 +0100
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 9:19 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Marsson C. <marss...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Does it mean Cake 3.0´s Model will return objects instead of arrays ?

Yes

"Model layer rewrite:

Models to return objects from queries"

--
Andy Gale
http://andy-gale.com
http://twitter.com/andygale


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Serkan Sipahi  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 6 2012, 9:30 am
From: Serkan Sipahi <serkan.sip...@yahoo.de>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:30:09 +0100 (BST)
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 9:30 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

nice :)

________________________________
 Von: Andy Gale <a...@salgo.net>
An: cake-php@googlegroups.com
Gesendet: 15:19 Freitag, 6.Juli 2012
Betreff: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Marsson C. <marss...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Does it mean Cake 3.0´s Model will return objects instead of arrays ?

Yes

"Model layer rewrite:

Models to return objects from queries"

--
Andy Gale
http://andy-gale.com
http://twitter.com/andygale

--
Our newest site for the community: CakePHP Video Tutorials http://tv.cakephp.org
Check out the new CakePHP Questions site http://ask.cakephp.org and help others with their CakePHP related questions.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cake-php+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
José Lorenzo  
View profile  
 More options Jul 6 2012, 10:07 am
From: José Lorenzo <jose....@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 07:07:26 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 10:07 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

They were just a bad copy of the query string with tons of problems and
performance issues. They will continue to work in read-only mode, but cake
will produce query string variables instead.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
José Lorenzo  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 6 2012, 10:11 am
From: José Lorenzo <jose....@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 07:11:50 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 10:11 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

On Friday, July 6, 2012 8:47:18 AM UTC-4:30, Marsson wrote:

> Does it mean Cake 3.0´s Model will return objects instead of arrays ?

Yes :)


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
José Lorenzo  
View profile  
 More options Jul 6 2012, 10:12 am
From: José Lorenzo <jose....@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 07:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 10:12 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

You will be able to work with the table object and have arrays returned
back. Models (rows) will be objects, though.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
lowpass  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 6 2012, 1:51 pm
From: lowpass <zijn.digi...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 13:51:30 -0400
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 1:51 pm
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future
I'm also cautious about moving to objects. I really like the way
Cake's arrays work. However, I presume that this will mean that the
model will be available in the view, which will be useful in some
cases.

Whatever the case, I'm looking forward to 3.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
the_woodsman  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 6 2012, 5:50 pm
From: the_woodsman <elwood.ca...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:50:27 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 5:50 pm
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

I've worked with Cake since the 1.1 release, and recently I've worked a lot
with Symfony, and on larger scale apps, which has helped me understand the
strengths and weaknesess of both frameworks.

So, a chance to express an opinion on the future of Cake? How could I
possibly resist :)

(Disclaimer: All of this is just my opinion /POV, not preaching here...)

Obviously it's important not to throw the baby out with the bath water -
DRY, Convention over config, auto-magic/scaffold features, etc are some of
the key features that differentiate Cake from other frameworks, and losing
this for the sake of a design pattern or a ridiculous amount of abstraction
shouldn't be risked.

 * A clearer Dependency Injection model for core classes. I didn't think
Cake had anything like this then I read a post on overriding the Request
class, and I was like 'is this DI?' SF2 has a DI component that can be
reused for this I think.

 * Appropriate use of arrays. There's a time and a place for arrays, and,
imho, data is a good use, and advanced config is not.
I love Cake's convention over config approach (vs the bloated yaml files of
Symfony) but when you *do* need  that config, arrays won't cut-it  for more
complex stuff.
The support for ini files in Cake 2 is a great step forward in this, and,
imho, json, xml, and  ini files should be natively supported for some app
config, and similar for  value-object creation.

 * Greater modularity - obviously the move to name spaces (and I hope PSR
standards?) is linked to this.
I think partitioning the folders as per
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/cake-php/msttsVAG9tI,
and making the different libraries work independently, would be ideal- why
shouldn't someone be able to use the SF2 Router and the ZF Controller layer
and the Cake model layer if that's what works for them? Or migrate their
enterprise app over to another framework incrementally?

For example, take the model layer-  Imho, the model later is one of Cake's
best features, and changes should be cautious.
* Standalone library -  I think being able to use Cake's model layer as a
stand-alone would massively increase the mind-share of Cake.
 * OO changes - it's a matter of opinion, but Cake's arrays aren't really a
massive issue for me. Given you can usually access arrays with object
syntax, and there's various community behaviors to achieve this effect
anyway, I don't think this a deal breaker.  

Value Objects makes some sense, but I personally hope Cake never goes the
way of $record->save, and always keeps with $model->save.
Imho, putting too much DB behaviour into the row-level objects leads to a
much more complex system, where it's a lot easier to implement poor SQL.
If people want that approach, don't re-invent the wheel,  Doctrine and
Propel are mature libs and they don't need any more competitors :)

One places the models could definitely do with a revamp is the setting of
validation rules.  
Once I'm 4 levels deep into the array config, I wish I was making classes
or objects or using a separate config format!

Okay, sorry for the rant, but I'd be interested  to see how closely my
views align with the community at large...


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
lowpass  
View profile   Translate to Translated (View Original)
 More options Jul 6 2012, 6:20 pm
From: lowpass <zijn.digi...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 18:20:05 -0400
Local: Fri, Jul 6 2012 6:20 pm
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future
I'm excited to try out 3.0 but please, PLEASE don't make Cake into
anything like Symfony! Do. Not. Like.

I agree that model validation could use some freshening, although I
don't personally have any great ideas for doing that.

I don't understand the desire to use parts of one framework with
another, btw. Or even using the model layer on its own. I know I may
just be missing something but it seems bizarre to me.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
tigr  
View profile  
 More options Jul 7 2012, 5:35 am
From: tigr <alb...@tigr.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 02:35:08 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sat, Jul 7 2012 5:35 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

No, that is not "nice". The strength of the CakePHP design is in being very
straightforward when it comes to working with the data. I have seen other
frameworks and I think that object-oriented ways are not suitable for
working with data. Well, of course, you can, but would you want to, given a
choice? My answer was "no" and that is why I am using Cake. I am worried
that the object-oriented hype will get the best of you and we will lose a
perfectly sensible data processing framework to the object-oriented glory.
For practical reasons, it would be great to leave the model layer
principles as they are.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
j0n4s.h4rtm4nn@googlemail .com  
View profile  
 More options Jul 8 2012, 12:04 am
From: "j0n4s.h4rtm...@googlemail.com" <j0n4s.h4rtm...@googlemail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 21:04:45 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sun, Jul 8 2012 12:04 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

On Saturday, 7 July 2012 11:35:08 UTC+2, tigr wrote:

> No, that is not "nice". The strength of the CakePHP design is in being
> very straightforward when it comes to working with the data. I have seen
> other frameworks and I think that object-oriented ways are not suitable for
> working with data. Well, of course, you can, but would you want to, given a
> choice? My answer was "no" and that is why I am using Cake. I am worried
> that the object-oriented hype will get the best of you and we will lose a
> perfectly sensible data processing framework to the object-oriented glory.
> For practical reasons, it would be great to leave the model layer
> principles as they are.

my few cents:

a.) fork it
b.) if cake is decoupled enough = forking will be easy (e.g. the decoupling
between model layer from controller layer from view helper etc.)
c.) instead of forking, add a 2nd model layer abstraction
d.) learn from rails3
e.) look at how well AREL works

so for me the questions are rather: can a similar decoupling be done well
in php 5.4; can we get true objects or just read only? if we get read only,
can't we just enable a bool to return nested data arrays?


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Greg Skerman  
View profile  
 More options Jul 8 2012, 10:12 pm
From: Greg Skerman <gsker...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 12:12:32 +1000
Local: Sun, Jul 8 2012 10:12 pm
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

For mine, being able to deal with objects in the view would greatly improve
the readability of data (the whole $user['User']['email'] etc looks
incredibly difficult to read to me, compared with $user->email which would
be much nicer).

I've always felt dealing with arrays is a bit of a 'hack'. I understand the
choice, but I think the idea to move towards a more object oriented
approach is more than hype, and long overdue.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Jamescowhen  
View profile  
 More options Jul 9 2012, 1:19 pm
From: Jamescowhen <x...@splitp.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 10:19:01 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Mon, Jul 9 2012 1:19 pm
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

I would think moving to a more object oriented model will result in better
readable code and IDE auto completion will be more useful.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Madhan madz  
View profile  
 More options Jul 9 2012, 9:57 pm
From: Madhan madz <madz.hum...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:57:20 +0800
Local: Mon, Jul 9 2012 9:57 pm
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

Wouldn't array be still used? For instance more than one objects are
passed, should the objects be stored in an array? What would happen to the
auto conversion to json? Array is easier to convert to json rite?
On Jul 10, 2012 1:19 AM, "Jamescowhen" <x...@splitp.com> wrote:


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
WyriHaximus  
View profile  
 More options Jul 10 2012, 2:55 am
From: WyriHaximus <webmas...@wyrihaximus.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 23:55:23 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Tues, Jul 10 2012 2:55 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

http://php.net/manual/en/class.serializable.php :).


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Celso  
View profile  
 More options Jul 13 2012, 2:08 pm
From: Celso <cels...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:08:40 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Fri, Jul 13 2012 2:08 pm
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

A example of the new Model approach?


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
mark_story  
View profile  
 More options Jul 14 2012, 9:21 pm
From: mark_story <mark.st...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 18:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sat, Jul 14 2012 9:21 pm
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

I'm not aware of any plans to make the good parts of Cake worse.  We fully
plan on keeping things like Convention over config, and features like bake
and scaffolding around, perhaps even make them better.

I find it strange that you think arrays are not adequate for configuration,
but cite yaml + json as more adequate.  Both these data formats parse into
arrays.  Wouldn't that also imply that arrays are equally good?  I know
that arrays can have a more finicky syntax than say yaml, but json is
equally tedious to edit.

I would be interested in alternative ways to declaratively create
validation rules.  One reason there are so many nested arrays, is that PHP
doesn't really provide many other ways to statically define complex
functionality.  Perhaps validation rules shouldn't be treated as a
declartive configuration type thing, and instead built at runtime using a
fluent interface?  I think trying to define validation rules in a format
like ini files would end pretty horribly.

-Mark


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
mark_story  
View profile  
 More options Jul 14 2012, 9:26 pm
From: mark_story <mark.st...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 18:26:18 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sat, Jul 14 2012 9:26 pm
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

There isn't really an example yet, as no code has been written.  Based on
this thread it might be a helpful process to go through a public vetting of
the proposed model api, and how some common use cases might work.  I know
that josé has begun implementing basic database abstraction which an api
that resembles PDO, but no work on the actual model layer has started.

-Mark


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
bruno  
View profile  
 More options Jul 16 2012, 4:46 am
From: bruno <brun...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 01:46:10 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Mon, Jul 16 2012 4:46 am
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

When I started to build a behavior for queries to return object in place of
array (Active Record Pattern for cakePHP, in the bakery), I was not aware
of the plans for CakePHP 3.0. But according to the discussion here, some
people seems worrying about being obliged of using objects in place of
arrays (this would also make application upgrade really difficullt or
nearly impossible). Wouldn't be wiser to let the developer to decide
whether he wants arrays or objects? And to propose for example an
integration with Doctrine (or to enhance the behavior I wrote)?
Thank you anyway for your hard work to improve cakePHP!

Op vrijdag 6 juli 2012 04:36:03 UTC+2 schreef José Lorenzo het volgende:


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Devario Johnson  
View profile  
 More options Aug 7 2012, 1:14 pm
From: Devario Johnson <devario...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 10:14:45 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Tues, Aug 7 2012 1:14 pm
Subject: Re: 3.0: a peek into CakePHP's future

Make router faster = #win


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Messages 1 - 25 of 61   Newer >
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic