I want PHP!!!

[babylon]

Even Python considered easy but a lot of developers still prefer PHP.
I wondering why Google preview this service while it only support one
programming language. This service is not ready for anything even for
preview. I hope during this preview period Google will add support PHP
and Ruby On Rails. You will have to think twice if you want to migrate
your apps to this service. When your apps is succesful , almost no
company will be willing to purchase your idea because of the high cost
of migrating that code out of Google even you have a large pool of
users. Except Google itself. Be careful..

[Brett Morgan]

In short, scaling out is hard to do. Scaling out with a multiplicity
of engines is even harder. They are doing what any good software team
will do - limit scope so as not to explode.

RoR and PHP are both very SQL orientated, and neither are Google
native programming languages. Porting RoR over GAE means a fairly
serious rejigging of ActiveRecord.

[Newman Hunter]

I think allot of developers would like to see the big three (Python,
PHP, RoR) supported in AppEngine, but considering how the sandboxing
has to occur in regards to feature sets, adding a language could be a
monumental undertaking.

PHP in particular has a massive amount of functionality included out
of the box. Allot of python's power comes from it's libraries, so
making modifications gives developers options in adding abstraction
between their app and the Google specific SDK. Most PHP apps are build
on the core PHP functionality, making abstraction more inconvenient
for developers and more difficult for proper sandboxing.

If anything, PHP would be the most likely second candidate for
AppEngine, as it is the most popular web development language at the
moment. Hordes of developers would be looking to port applications
when it became available.

[detz]

Perl would work better than "The big three".

[Chris Ledet]

I would have to agree with you on PHP most likely being the 2nd
support language. PHP would be a lot easier to implement, then again
just supporting the Ruby language and not Rails would be A LOT easier!
I really hope Ruby support (with or w/o Rails) comes really soon!

[Brett Morgan]

I hate to think how much code would have to be audited in the php code
base to make sure that the php code being run isn't impacting the
runtime environment.

[Lee O]

Blech, google is python, what do you expect? :)

Not that this is a bad thing imo, i love python, and im loving Google App Engine

--
Lee Olayvar
http://www.leeolayvar.com

[Brett Morgan]

There are always advantages to having the Benevolent Dictator for Life
in house. =)

[luismgz]

Honestly, do yourself a favor and spend half an hour with the python
tutorial and the interpreter running.
You will ask yourself why you waisted so much time with that
abomination called PHP...

[Michael Tsyganov]

Just get PHP-Interpreter writte in Python

[Brett Morgan]

*blink*

There's a php interpreter written in python now?

[Raffaele Castagno]

On Apr 9, 2:50 pm, Newman Hunter <concept...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think allot of developers would like to see the big three (Python,
> PHP, RoR) supported in AppEngine, but considering how the sandboxing
> has to occur in regards to feature sets, adding a language could be a
> monumental undertaking.

Then what is Java? The "gigantic one"?

Anyway, I think it's obvious that if Google AppEngine team wrote about
"more languages" to be supported in AppEngine itself, it means that
they already know how to proceed.

Anyway, it would be really nice to have some Google comment about how
the runtime works, and what's boiling in the GAE craddle.

Raffaele

[Berco Beute]

Exactly.
2B

[max7]

I read article about google few years ago. It was said that python and
java are most favorable languages in google.
This article was on sun's sites and mostly was written about google's
experiences switching from java 1.4 to java 5.

Do you really know if it is python? It could be Jython.
If I am right then next language could be Groovy, BeanShell or JRuby.

[Brett Morgan]

Jython would be a bad fit for the CGI model given the jvm's startup
characteristics.