Login | Register
My pages Projects Community openCollabNet

Reply to message

* = Required fields
* Subject
* Body
Send reply to
Author (directly in email)
Please type the letters in the image above.

Original message

Author Alan Pinstein <apinstein@mac.com>
Full name Alan Pinstein <apinstein@mac.com>
Date 2006-07-22 12:13:38 PDT
Message Ok well that's cool then! I wasn't aware that it was possible.


On Jul 22, 2006, at 1:49 PM, Pedram Nimreezi wrote:

> It can... If it couldn't I couldn't for example.. make a Memcache
> Session Handler from the Memcache class
> provided by the Memcache PECL nor would it make sense to make for
> example a propel-gen-pecl-c++.
> On 7/22/06, Alan Pinstein <apinstein at mac dot com> wrote:
> SDO looks pretty interesting. Never heard of it.
> However, I still don't think you answered my question.
> You proposed using propel-gen to create C++ classes for objects
> that could be compiled as a PECL, to get the execution speed of C++
> with the flexibility of Propel.
> However, the propel generator creates a PHP object hierarchy, which
> you then modify the Object.php and ObjectPeer.php classes with your
> business logic.
> I am not aware of the ability to expose classes via PECL. All the
> times I have used it, it can return objects that implement
> interfaces, but never actual PHP classes that could be extended.
> For instance, if you use propel-gen-c++ to generate a MyObjectBase*
> as a PECL, I don't think you can then, in PHP, do:
> class MyObject extends MyObjectBase
> {
> function customCode()
> {
> // do something
> }
> }
> I don't believe this is possible, but I am not certain. And if it's
> not, the idea of propel-gen-c++ doesn't seem useful.
> I know you said that it was done in the links you sent, but I don't
> have time to dig through piles of links and CVS trees looking for
> this example. Feel free to provide a direct link showing how this
> is done.
> Thanks!
> Alan
> On Jul 22, 2006, at 12:39 PM, Pedram Nimreezi wrote:
>> Am I sure it would be a good idea? Well I do have at least *some*
>> evidence
>> I mean IBM hasn't really done open source PHP until they did SDO
>> which is
>> a C++ and PHP API similar in purpose and design to creole and
>> propel, SDO
>> is to PDO as propel is to creole, meaning SDO relies on PDO for
>> its data base
>> accessibility. PDO unlike creole is written in C (afaik). SDO
>> unlike propel in C++,
>> PDO and SDO unlike propel and creole must be installed into PHP
>> either statically
>> through ./configure or dynamically through phpize, moved to the
>> location specified in
>> php.ini as extension_dir = and loaded like you would a
>> standard .dll or .so extension.
>> SDO does not have "optionally" a script-able interface to itself
>> from PHP, it actually
>> requires it since SDO was never completely ported to C++ from PHP,
>> or they couldn't
>> find the time to write the remaining portions so those objects are
>> written in PHP 5, there
>> is no PHP 4 version as SDO remains completely dependent on PDO for
>> database access.
>> Therefore I think it would be a *good* idea because they can be
>> similar in speeds and propel
>> can obviously spit out PHP 4, PHP 5 and now C++, why not PECL? or
>> why not write the other
>> classes as PHP 4 and PHP 5 compatible and then refactor that into
>> a PECL so the only
>> scripting is done on initialization code, makes little sense not
>> to pursue this because *some*
>> people cannot personally install an extension in their web server
>> which would actually lower
>> the load on the server and increase the throughput for this *good*
>> type of programming.
>> I would just like to say that I don't use SDO, I use propel
>> and creole because I just like to,
>> I rewrote creole and propel to be PHP 4 AND PHP 5 compatible and
>> like that much better in
>> my "rapid" framework whose design includes things for SEO and SOA.
>> I've requested before at least for mine or the PHP 4 version
>> be dual licensed under LGPL
>> and BSD License, so that I can dual license MY framework under BSD
>> license as well, also
>> SDO is provided under much less restriction than the LPGL. I think
>> helping make these patterns
>> for advanced web application programming better and faster will
>> help everyone. I know I wouldn't
>> of had any reason to dedicate a couple years using propel and
>> creole, or want to be involved had
>> it not been for such good open source contributors like Hans, the
>> PHP user groups and yourself.
>> Ps, Here's a list of sites on the matter that may shed some light
>> on SDO and PECL implementations
>> where you can subclass classes and more. Don't forget to look all
>> in the CVS code and tests..
>> http://us2.php.net/sdo
>> http://www.zend.com/​pecl/tutorials/sdo.p​hp
>> http://www-128.ibm.c​om/developerworks/li​brary/os-sdophp/
>> http://en.wikipedia.​org/wiki/Metadata
>> On 7/22/06, Alan Pinstein < apinstein at mac dot com> wrote:
>> Are you sure? Would you be able to subclass classes provided in PECL?
>> One still needs to write custom business logic on their propel
>> objects... how would that work?
>> I don't know much about PECL so LMK!
>> Alan
>> On Jul 22, 2006, at 11:11 AM, Pedram Nimreezi wrote:
>>> Ok.. but making them as PECL's is a good idea too... I might do
>>> that...
>> --
>> ~
>> Pedram Nimreezi -- President/Senior Engineer
>> Major Computing, Inc
>> --
>> Not by age, but by knowledge is wisdom acquired.
> --
> ~
> Pedram Nimreezi -- President/Senior Engineer
> Major Computing, Inc
> --
> Not by age, but by knowledge is wisdom acquired.