Python vs PHP

Re: Python vs PHP

Hi !

PHP-5 let down MySql, for Sql-Lite (rumor ?)

Python has good support for MySql AND Sql-Lite.

@+

Michel Claveau

Re: Python vs PHP

In article <mailman.105757 4470.1750.pytho n-list@python.org >,
Catalin <ady982@ploiest i.astral.ro> wrote:[color=blue]
>
>Can Python replace PHP?
>Can I use a python program to make an interface to a mysql 4.X database?[/color]

The short answer is "yes" to both questions, but with a caveat: Python is
a general-purpose programming language, where PHP is designed to write
web applications. So it's not quite as simple/straightforward to use
Python the same way you use PHP for plain web pages; conversely, if
you've been running into difficulty with PHP in trying to write
complicated program logic, you'll find Python a big help.
--
Aahz (aahz@pythoncra ft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"Not everything in life has a clue in front of it...." --JMS

Re: Python vs PHP

News M Claveau /Hamster-P wrote:[color=blue]
> Hi !
>
> PHP-5 let down MySql, for Sql-Lite (rumor ?)[/color]

PHP 5 won't come bundled with a default MySql lib, but anyone is still
free to link against the official MySQL lib, one way or another...

And yes, the default 'bundled-in' SQL lib should be Sql-lite.

Bruno

Re: Python vs PHP

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 13:47:00 +0300, Catalin
<ady982@ploiest i.astral.ro> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Can Python replace PHP?[/color]

Sure. Look at http://spyce.sourceforge.net
[color=blue]
>Can I use a python program to make an interface to a mysql 4.X database?[/color]

Of course, you can. http://www.python.org/sigs/db-sig/
E.g. http://dustman.net/andy/python/MySQLdb_obsolete
[color=blue]
>If that's possible where can I find a tutorial?[/color]




--
JZ

Re: Python vs PHP

On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 11:14:10AM +0200, Jaroslaw Zabiello wrote:[color=blue]
> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 13:47:00 +0300, Catalin
> <ady982@ploiest i.astral.ro> wrote:
>[color=green]
> >Can Python replace PHP?[/color]
>
> Sure. Look at http://spyce.sourceforge.net
>[/color]

Lest the OP think Spyce is the only or even the preferred solution for web
programming with Python:



















And let's not forget plain old CGI and mod_python.

Jp

--
"There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their
home."
-- Ken Olson, President of DEC, World Future Society
Convention, 1977

Re: Python vs PHP

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 13:47:00 +0300, Catalin <ady982@ploiest i.astral.ro>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>Can Python replace PHP?
>Can I use a python program to make an interface to a mysql 4.X database?
>If that's possible where can I find a tutorial?
>[/color]

I recommend Spyce, Webware, or Quixote depending on your requirements,
but Draco, SkunkWeb, RoadKill are worth looking into as well. Spyce is
really the best (for PHP-ness) in my opinion, after you actually get past
the fact that it supports your old fashioned notion of what embedded
delimiters should look like, as well as a new CTS-friendly alternative.

Spyce is the closest thing to PHP, but also provides some features PHP
does not. However, I think you will find some people, like myself, who are
still unable to make the switch from PHP to Python for web development,
because of a lot of little things. These people know Python is better and
may even know their non-web PHP applications are hell compared to their
Python re-implementations . However, they still use PHP for web development
and feel they have to. They may have even written out all the requirements
and received vague responses to them.

Python web development is fragmented. Mod_python CVS now contains the work
of what used to be mod_psp by Sterling Hughes, a PHP warlord, I'm sure
he'll reply. This possibly soon to be official 'PSP' is not much in my
opinion and should probably not be folded into mod_python. Others agree:



Another big problem with Python web development is the lack of good shared
hosting support. Primarily the lack of anything resembling PHP's safe
mode. Mod_python has no equivalent of this safe mode, but Apache 2's
'Perchild MPM' is supposed deprecates this need. However, this still
requires an httpd.conf edit and a restart of Apache for every user added,
very annoying, especially to a shared hosting service.





A couple other slight issues :

* catch-all error handling not as flexible or non-existent
* no equivalent to php_value auto_prepend_fi le "_header.ph p"
* no equivalent to php_value auto_append_fil e "_footer.ph p"
* not as intelligent form value handling
* white space sensitivity is a unique problem when embedding

The best options for me are currently :

* use PHP
* use Spyce
* fork Spyce (creating more fragmentation)
* embed python straight into my favorite platform (quite funny)
* write my own mod_python-based platform (more fragmentation)
* find the holy grail (i must have missed it)

I've been handling this dilemma for months. I've even benchmarked quite a
few possible solutions, with pleasing results in those which I thought
were well done, and pleasing results for Python over PHP in general.

-AB

Re: Python vs PHP

In article <kmolgv4mp12o71 ocion7ra0m2s9fc rqjdk@4ax.com>, Afanasiy wrote:[color=blue]
> A couple other slight issues :
>
> * catch-all error handling not as flexible or non-existent
> * no equivalent to php_value auto_prepend_fi le "_header.ph p"
> * no equivalent to php_value auto_append_fil e "_footer.ph p"
> * not as intelligent form value handling
> * white space sensitivity is a unique problem when embedding[/color]

Try jonpy (http://jonpy.sf.net/), it solves all of the above.
Also you may find FastCGI (which jonpy supports) helps with your
"safe mode" problem, although it might require a bit of hackery.

Re: Python vs PHP

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 15:56:58 GMT, Afanasiy <abelikov72@hot mail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 13:47:00 +0300, Catalin <ady982@ploiest i.astral.ro>
>wrote:[/color]
[color=blue]
>A couple other slight issues :
>
>* catch-all error handling not as flexible or non-existent
>* no equivalent to php_value auto_prepend_fi le "_header.ph p"
>* no equivalent to php_value auto_append_fil e "_footer.ph p"
>* not as intelligent form value handling
>* white space sensitivity is a unique problem when embedding[/color]

I think I should add import, pythonpath and module caching to this list.
These are much more annoying than PHP's inclusion mechanisms. I am even
annoyed in non-web applications by them quite often, but not necessarily
all at the same time.

Also add to the list, the need for PyChecker. You must run PyChecker
to discover errors which would occur on a section of logic being hit
which contained a silly typographical error. PHP would discover these
without them being hit, when you were developing the page.

Python is more beautiful and more powerful, but for this purpose I
consider the current implementations still lacking compared to PHP.
So much so that I am unable to bring myself to write new PHP, but
unable to continue using Python until I find the perfect implementation.

-AB

Re: Python vs PHP

On 8 Jul 2003 16:02:48 GMT, Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@une quivocal.co.uk>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>In article <kmolgv4mp12o71 ocion7ra0m2s9fc rqjdk@4ax.com>, Afanasiy wrote:[color=green]
>> A couple other slight issues :
>>
>> * catch-all error handling not as flexible or non-existent
>> * no equivalent to php_value auto_prepend_fi le "_header.ph p"
>> * no equivalent to php_value auto_append_fil e "_footer.ph p"
>> * not as intelligent form value handling
>> * white space sensitivity is a unique problem when embedding[/color]
>
>Try jonpy (http://jonpy.sf.net/), it solves all of the above.
>Also you may find FastCGI (which jonpy supports) helps with your
>"safe mode" problem, although it might require a bit of hackery.[/color]

No, CGI is not an option and I tried jonpy. I kept my notes about it...

Re: Python vs PHP

In article <moulgv8ehi6680 j6to1ai6tlmopm0 srons@4ax.com>, Afanasiy wrote:[color=blue]
> CGI, FastCGI, SCGI are not faster than mod_python in my experience and
> straightforward benchmark.[/color]

In the case of CGI, yes of course. In the case of FastCGI, your
experience contradicts my own.
[color=blue]
> That's all I can really say about it. CGI is not an option for me.[/color]

I don't understand why you keep saying "CGI is not an option" when
nobody has suggested that you use it.

Re: Python vs PHP

On 8 Jul 2003 17:59:12 GMT, Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@une quivocal.co.uk>
wrote:

[color=blue]
>I don't understand why you keep saying "CGI is not an option" when
>nobody has suggested that you use it.[/color]

Ok

Re: Python vs PHP

On 8 Jul 2003 17:59:12 GMT,
Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@une quivocal.co.uk> wrote:[color=blue]
> I don't understand why you keep saying "CGI is not an option" when
> nobody has suggested that you use it.[/color]

Jon, there's no point in debating Afanasiy about CGI. He's convinced
packages for Python web programming support are inadequate (*all* of them),
is unable to explain what the problem is or what his requirements are, and
doesn't seem to really understand the subject (e.g. thinking FastCGI is
basically the same as regular CGI). Ignoring him is the best course.

--amk

Re: Python vs PHP

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 20:46:53 -0500, "A.M. Kuchling" <amk@amk.ca> wrote:
[color=blue]
>On 8 Jul 2003 17:59:12 GMT,
> Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@une quivocal.co.uk> wrote:[color=green]
>> I don't understand why you keep saying "CGI is not an option" when
>> nobody has suggested that you use it.[/color]
>
>Jon, there's no point in debating Afanasiy about CGI. He's convinced
>packages for Python web programming support are inadequate (*all* of them),
>is unable to explain what the problem is or what his requirements are, and
>doesn't seem to really understand the subject (e.g. thinking FastCGI is
>basically the same as regular CGI). Ignoring him is the best course.[/color]

Read.

Re: Python vs PHP

In article <K6GcnTvaKdGQ6Z aiRTvUqA@speake asy.net>, A.M. Kuchling wrote:[color=blue]
> Jon, there's no point in debating Afanasiy about CGI. He's convinced
> packages for Python web programming support are inadequate (*all* of them),
> is unable to explain what the problem is or what his requirements are, and
> doesn't seem to really understand the subject (e.g. thinking FastCGI is
> basically the same as regular CGI). Ignoring him is the best course.[/color]

Oh, ok, ta ;-)