Now, the question is early February, or late February?

Joshua Eichorn (among others) notices that active record can’t work as shown in the Zend Framework webcast. The syntax presented during the web cast is not possible in PHP because of inherited static methods are treated. Mike Naberezny notes the problem and suggests that it will end up getting fixed in PHP:

We’ve been working on the solution to the problem with statics on the C front, so eventually it will be solved there.

In the sitepoint thread Trouble in Zend Framework Land?, 33degrees smells vaporware:

I find it amusing that they did the webcast using that syntax, while there is currently no way of implementing it in PHP5. Makes you wonder how much code they’d actually written at that point.

Elizabeth Marie Smith does too and adds:

I find it rather annoying that they haven’t fixed the problem BEFORE now – after all, the bugs (marked bogus or wont fix because obviously the zend guys weren’t using php5 at that point if they didn’t see the problem until zend framework came along) the bugs/requests have been around for a LONG TIME

I look at this incident as an incredibly good omen. My optimism about Zend’s PHP framework is not for the framework itself, but for what it means for OO support in PHP. In my book, the more developers that have commit access to both ZPF and to PHP, the better PHP 6 will be for me. I look at ZPF as an important step in building a culture of objects in the PHP community.

What?

In my previous post, I talked about how the leaders of the agile development culture seemed to be migrating from Java to Ruby with nary a glance at PHP. One of the reasons is that PHP lacks a culture of objects.

Support for object oriented constructs in PHP is relatively new, rough, and uneven. PHP competetors Ruby, Python, Java, and .NET all have OO class libraries, yet PHP does not. The classes and interfaces that PHP does have are not necessarily what I would hold up as paragons of modern OO design.

I can see why this would be the case. PHP is written in C. Being an expert in C programming does not necessarily make one an expert in object oriented programming (nor does it preclude it). My impression from reading the php-dev mailing list is that of a C culture rather than a object culture. (witness the goto vs exceptions debate.)

I’ll save any critique of PHP’s built in classes for OO for future blog posts. Instead, lets look at PHP’s documentation. I regard PHP’s online documentation as excellent. Its one of the factors that drew me to PHP in the first place. I especially like the comments system. Yet, go the the front page and search for one of the built in classes. Try “exception.” Helpful? Did you know to switch the dropdown from the default functions option first? I’d like to link to the documentation for the Exception class. Where should I link? Classes are not first class citizens in the PHP manual as functions are.

Try searching for the ‘getTraceAsString’ method of the Exception class. I’d like to leave a comment about it, where should I go?

My purpose is not to run down PHP’s support for objects. Merely to suggest that there is more work yet to be done for first class support.

Ok, so PHP doesn’t exactly have a culture of objects. Who cares about objects?

To answer that, I want to explore the complex relationship between PHP and Zend. A good way to highlight the distinction is to look at the PHP usage numbers and the adoption rates for PHP 5. While web hosts account for the vast majority of the PHP usage numbers as reported, they have been slow to convert to PHP 5. On the other hand, Zend reports that 50% of their customers have adopted PHP 5, suggesting that Zend’s customers are a bit different than the general PHP using population.

I think the PHP 5 adoption rates show that Zend’s customers care about objects. I suspect that some of the object support in PHP 5 is a result of feedback from Zend’s customers.

Zend is not a charity. I would imagine the ZPF project consumes a great number of resources and they are doing it for a reason. I think Zend’s customers also care about frameworks. It sure looks to me like the ZPF project was triggered by Rails.

So somewhere in the ZPF project, they should be trying to do the same thing in rails and in ZPF and comparing the code. (if they don’t there are a bunch of bloggers, me included, who will do it for them.) I’m sure their customers will do it too. Perhaps the Active Record syntax shown in the webcast was inspired from such a comparison? I think that in order to look good in these comparisons, some aspects of PHP’s object support are going to have to be improved. Static inheritance won’t be the last thing to get fixed.

Its is the zend framework effort thats going to put the finish on what PHP 5 started. I honestly believe that PHP 6 is going to end up a runaway success. (Is it still true that only the even numbered star trek moves are good?)

So if PHP doesn’t exactly have the best reputation as an object oriented language, what can we do about it. Or specifically, what can Zend do about it?

Well, when Microsoft was being criticized for the lack of patterns in their PetStore example, what did the do? One, they fixed it. Two, they hired Martin Fowler’s company to write about .net patterns. Ever notice how many .Net patterns there are in Martin Fowler’s Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture Book?

I’d like to see Zend hire a reputable object guru to help PHP turn around its object reputation. This should be someone who is known outside the PHP community, someone who has been going to OOPSLA for longer than PHP has existed. Someone who has a book on object oriented programming, articles, a blog, and who is an expert at teaching object oriented programming (10 years to be an expert). Writing and teaching help hone ones thoughts and this job requires a communicator.

To start, Zend can put this person to work both advising on ZPF and telling the world about ZPF. However, I would hope a longer term goal would be to apply some deep experience in coordinating and advising on the classes and interfaces that are going into the language itself.

I would hate to see the sales objection “php’s functions are inconsistent” morph into “php’s classes are inconsistent.” Not only that, today’s class and interface designs are going to be around a long time. Public refactoring is not a good in a language class library or in a widely used framework. Witness the slow adoption of PHP 5 and the problems with reference changes in 4.4, 5.0.5. Deep experience can help get a better design at the outset.

I for one welcome our new object oriented overlords.

Chris Shiflet and PHP Developer both have coverage of the webcast. The webcast even caught some attention from the Rails camp.

I won’t try to summarize the webcast here, but instead offer a few impressions.

I found the webcast to be interesting, although it didn’t really answer the primary questions I have about the structure of the front controller and form processing. ZActiveRecord, ZMail, and ZSearch are fine components, but my interest lies in the controllers because that is the area where there is the least consensus about the state of the art. One red flag for me was the suggestion of putting business logic in actions. Nothing but a high level overview was given of the controllers, but this perks my ears as an issue in MVC separation.

The coding standards emphasize not reserving global resources. The framework will not define functions or global constants, it uses exceptions and doesn’t reserve __autoload for its own use. This is very good. On the other hand, it seems to rely on static methods quite a bit, which I think can burn you over the long run if you are trying to offer a componentized architecture and can make code more difficult to test. I’ve been moving away from static methods as much as I can in my own code. Eventually, I always seem to regret using them. They lure you in at the beginning with the promise of simplicity and then they punish you later with their inflexibility.

I wonder how many of the components do their own “connection management” such as with the ZSearch::open (static methods again)? This strikes me as an opportunity for a general dependency injection mechanism. A technique that we are emphasizing more and more in WACT, but which I don’t think has reached widespread use in the PHP framework world.

One of the stated goals of the Zend Framework is to improve the PHP ecosystem. The webcast suggests that Zend PHP Framework will play well with others, allowing you to use the components independently, or for example use a different templating system with the framework. On the other hand, Andi suggested that all components will be distributed in their entirety. When asked if a stripped down version could be distributed, the answer was “Why would you want to?”

I don’t think a monolithic distribution mechanism will play well with the new ecosystem of components that is rising up based on the PEAR installer’s new channel capability. Eventually, the PEAR installer will move into the end user application installation space. To participate in this, ZPF should be available over a channel. I think a key success factor for the Zend framework will be the release of individual components via a PEAR channel.

It is much better to be able to declare dependencies on individual packages, rather than on one huge bundle of components. Monolithic distribution unnecessarily ties together the release schedules of packages that might otherwise have no common dependencies. Micro-packages on a PEAR channel are the future of PHP web application installation.

Overall, I think Zend is taking a good approach to the development of ZPF. I look forward to learning more.

Update: Just as writing tests is an important process element, because testable code is better code, I think that micro package releases are better than monolithic package releases from a process standpoint. The mere act of writing the components so that they can be independently released highlights unhealthy dependencies. This, of course, has to be tempered by an overall vision and cross-package duplicate code elimination. Two areas that have been challenges for PEAR with its political fiefdoms surrounding each package and one reason why PEAR is not a framework.

(P.S. Hurry up and release ZSearch. I want to use it.)

I’ve also seen some ill informed speculation that Zend PHP Framework will kill off PEAR. Um, not gonna happen. PEAR is a library, not a framework. Well, PEAR is a repository of libraries, not a framework. Well, I don’t know what PEAR is, but its not a framework.

What is a framework? I wrote a little bit about this in The value of MVC, but according the the GOF:

A Framework is a set of cooporating classes that make up a reusable design for a specific class of software. …

The framework dictates the architecture of your application. It will define the overall structure, its partitioning into classes and objects, the key responsibilities thereof, how the classes and objects collaborate, and the thread of control. A framework predefines these design parameters so that you, the application designer/implementor, can concentrate on the specifics of your application. The framework captures the design decisions that are common to its application domain. Frameworks thus emphasize design reuse over code reuse, though a framework will usually include concrete subclasses you can put to work immediately.

A reusable design for a specific class of software? That doesn’t sound like PEAR. It does sound a bit like ezPublish. Is ezComponents a framework by this definition? I don’t know.

Sebastian Bergmann doesn’t see competition between ezComponents and ZPF, suggesting that you can swap and combine. Scanning the list of ZPF components and the ezComponents shows overlap. Can you swap out ZTemplate for ezComponents Template or ZInputFilter for ezComponents UserInput?

I applaud ezComponent’s use of the PEAR installer. I hope that Zend PHP Framework embraces the PEAR installer as well.

The Java web framework landscape has become quite fragmented; the purpose of this group is to explore synergies among the existing frameworks that will make life easier for companies, organizations, and developers working using Java to build web applications.

A reaction to Rails?

As I suggested in The Value of MVC, the science of writing web applications is maturing and we are entering the age of frameworks.

Will there be a similar consolidation of PHP Frameworks? Or will Zend PHP Framework rule them all? eZ systems for one isn’t conceding just yet and continues with their eZ publish Enterprise Components. I expect other to do the same. We shall see.

Every once and a while I get an odd email from someone I have never heard of suggesting that WACT should merge with project X. The messages are usually poorly thought out and slightly insulting and never from anyone actually involved with either project X or WACT, but I certainly wouldn’t oppose such a thing if it made sense and there was some interest and synergy from the other party. Unfortunately, the fact that WACT 1.0 will support currently installed versions of PHP (meaning 4.x) is probably a deal breaker for the kinds of people who are interested in writing frameworks. After WACT 1.0 is out (Q1 2006) I would like to skip PHP 5 and target PHP 6 for WACT 2.0. (Other WACT stakeholders may have different ideas.) The framework landscape will probably be different then. And there is one other framework I’ve been keeping an eye on ….

Q: Describe the Zend PHP Framework. What is it and why is it needed?

A: Anyone building industrial-grade PHP applications knows there’s more to a well-designed, robust, scalable, secure PHP application than the language itself. The open source Zend PHP Framework is a body of PHP code that provides developers with the essential structure and services for an industrial-grade PHP Web application.

We also think that it’s very important this framework embody the “extreme simplicity” mindset that PHP itself exemplifies. We want to deliver a framework that helps solve developer problems and speeds development; not one that’s overly complex and heavyweight.

With this framework, PHP developers will have a big “jump start” when developing Web applications, with the ability to focus more on unique functionality and less on the plumbing and infrastructure that all applications share.

Q: Aren’t there other existing PHP frameworks? Why is this one different?

A: While there are other existing PHP frameworks, they are all either very specialized or don’t embody the “extreme simplicity” mindset I described above.

There’s a large need in the PHP community for a good, simple, but comprehensive, general-purpose framework for building robust, scalable, maintainable Web applications. By making this the initial deliverable of the PHP Collaboration Project, we can produce a framework that incorporates the best ideas from a large number of companies and individuals, while at the same time meeting the needs of most PHP developers.

So this is the announcement of the start of a project to build a framework? Not the announcement of the delivery of a framework?

I agree with their assessment of need. I’ve been saying that for a long time at SitePoint and here on this blog.

I can’t help but be reminded of a parable from The Zen of Programming:

“Curse these personal computers!” cried the novice in anger, “To make them do anything I must use three or even four editing programs. This is truly intolerable!”
The master programmer stared at the novice. “And what would you do to remedy this state of affairs?” he asked.

The novice thought for a moment. “I will design a new editing program,” he said, “a program that will replace all these others.”

Suddenly the master struck the novice on the side of his head.

“What did you do that for?” exclaimed the surprised novice.

“I have no wish to learn another editing program,” said the master.

And suddenly the novice was enlightened.

Has there ever been a framework project that didn’t promise being more “lightweight” than all the other pre-existing projects at the onset?

Being both general and extremely simple while providing a non-trivial value is very very very difficult. If it were easy, it wouldn’t be so hard to find an existing PHP framework that isn’t “overly complex and heavyweight.”

Its a worthy project with a difficult goal.

I’m looking forward to seeing more information and I’d like to help out however I can.

“PHP as a language isn’t isolated and people are going to be building SOA types of applications using XML and SOAP,” said Rod Smith, vice president of emerging technology at IBM.

“So the idea is to have an Eclipse plug-in here to leverage content [and] leverage the assets that have a Web services interface on it” and link to Java back-end systems, Smith said.

Both the Eclipse plug-in and development framework will be offered free.

ZDNet adds:

In addition, Zend will publish a PHP “framework,” or set of reusable PHP codes, also under an open-source license. The framework will allow third-party software companies to create add-ins that work in conjunction with Zend’s flagship product, Zend Studio.

Is Zend PHP Framework an add-in API for Zend Studio? You too can make a “Refactor single quotes to double quotes” plugin.

Perhaps some esoteric Java integration capability? Good News Everyone! Now your sloppy php web front end can grovel even lower before our mighty and wise java back end. I, for one, welcome our new Java overlords. I’d like to remind them that as guy with a blog I could be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground SOAP caves. **

Don’t flush yet, Davey.

Why build when you can acquire? Maybe ZPF is PRADO with IDE support? Prado 3 is due “later this year.” But then, so is eZ publish Enterprise Components.

A Struts clone? Thats so 2004.

A Rails clone? It would be pretty obvious who the competition is then.

Is Zend PHP Framework a component model? The best thing that could happen to PHP would be a standard component model. I’m just not sure that PHP 5.1 has all the language pieces in place for that yet. Unless they go with the java style accessor methods – ok if you are the vendor of a tool that auto-generates accessor method code, big suck if you have even a small awareness of Ruby.

I know nothing, but this speculation is almost as much fun as Crazy Apple Rumors.

Zend Technologies this week will announce Zend PHP Framework, a development environment for PHP applications. … Due later this year, Zend PHP Framework is intended to standardize the way PHP applications are built. A goal of the effort is to foster the development of mission-critical PHP Web applications.

I’m curious about the framework name. When I hear framework, I think API. Are they releasing a something intended to compete on the same level with Rails or .Net?

Zend also will reveal its participation in the open source Eclipse Foundation. … Zend will also join Eclipse as a Strategic Developer-level member and lead a project within Eclipse to develop a plug-in to the Eclipse workbench, for developing with PHP.

Or is this strictly an IDE announcement?

API, IDE or both? Got my attention.