Using Codeigniter classes - php

Can I use Codeigniter classes without implementing the whole mvc pattern the same way I can do it with Zend? For example, I would love to be able to use just some validation classes, or email class etc..

Yes, of course you can, but since some CI classes depend on certain aspects of the CI core (with good reason), you'll probably need to walk through the classes you wish to use to make sure it won't break. This isn't necessarily a terrible thing, as it will let you really understand what you're using. I haven't ever done it myself, but I've heard it's not particularly difficult to do. Give it a try and see how it works.

Related

Is there a (simple) way to separate models in pure PHP, and what is a good way of doing it?

What I'm looking for is a way to remove the model from a set of PHP files that make up a website. It's difficult (for me) to explain.
By models I mean models in an MVC sense.
As an example say I have this website:
index.php
about.php
shop.php
checkout.php
All of the above PHP files use the same database. I have separated the views by adding templates using a view.php file that renders the correct template with values passed to it.
I am not looking to use a framework that's already out there. I'm looking at writing my own in some senses, with only the bits I need to use in it.
If anyone would like to explain why this is not necessary, or a better way of doing things, then I'm open to that too.
Thanks in advance.
Writing you own MVC framework will take time, but you will learn a lot in the process. So, if you have the time/resources to do it I definitely encourage you to do so.
In this context here are some small pieces of advise that may help you:
Create your domain model first. I'm assuming that you are going in the OO way, so think about your domain problem and create the abstractions that best represent your problem. Try to keep it decoupled from cross-cutting concerns, like persistence.
Test a lot, test often. Try to test (and run your tests) as you create your domain model. This will be specially valuable when in 6 months you add a new feature and want to make sure that you haven't break anything. If you can separate your domain model from anything external (like the persistence layer or third party web services) the testing it is going to be a lot simpler. Today PHPUnit is pretty much the de-facto standard for unit testing in PHP.
You don't have to write everything from scratch. There are a lot of libraries that can help you to ease the development of an MVC framework, so that you can concentrate on what you really want to develop. For example, you could use Slim to handle the page routing or you could delegate the persistence stuff to Doctrine 2.
It is always nice to analyze how other frameworks solve things. You may want to look at products like Symfony or Kohana or even check how Elgg handles its views system. Also, if you want to check out something radically different you can take a look at Seaside's architecture.
Coming back to your original question, for me the key is to keep things from different layers as decoupled as possible. While I have only used the version 1, Doctrine 2 seems like a good candidate for persistence, since it allows you to create a domain model that is quite independent from the DB. This is a huge step. The second thing is how handle the view system. This is quite developer-taste dependent. For example, I like to model everything with objects, so I like Seaside's approach. On the other hand, Elgg's way of handling views is quite nice and maybe fits better with the way things are handled in PHP. Here is when you may benefit on doing some research before deciding on a route to go.
HTH
As someone who has written his own PHP framework, and with the same sensibility as yours, I can tell you that using a framework is a fine thing to do. That said, start by writing your own - you'll gain greater appreciation for the true structure and utility of a framework.
You'll want to learn about the Singleton object pattern. It is a major differentiator in the kinds of objects you can develop in your framework.
When you have written a few models that your files/controllers (presuming MVC) include, you will begin to see where to abstract a 'base mode' from which others extend (hint: the DB singleton).
When you start pulling in configs and the like, then you'll have your first framework object from which all other bases do their extension.

is there an opposite to an abstract class?

I am using my own home grown PHP framework and it is heavily based on components mostly from pear and Zend but lately there are some better components coming up at Composer
As my apps are growing it becomes harder to switch between components, and I am wondering if there is a way I can design my programs differently. In a way that would allow me to use components like the opposite of abstract classes.
I am thinking there should be a way for me to create my own classes, which in turn just hook in to pear or zend and use those classes like as if they wore interfaces or abstract classes. Of course they would be doing the actual work and I would just link to them.
Hypothetically if I have been using pear Config/Lite, which can only work with ini and array files, and now I like to switch to pear config or Zend config to get the benefit of saving the data in a database then there should be an easy way to switch without changing all my code since what they implement is exactly the same thing.
I am asking because I been using pears Net/URL/Mapper, which isn't bad but I found something that would also take care of the dispatching, and is being actively developed. Also I am sure that this kind of situation will come up again and again.
You want to look for something like the facade design pattern, or just use delegation / composition. However beware, using something like a facade can lead to a lot of unneeded complexity as you add layers of abstraction. I recommend you read some php design patterns, especially delegation / composition of objects to get a feel for how that might fit your case.
You should use composition for this IMO. Have the classes in your library expose their own public interface, which the rest of your code depends on. If you ever change the underpinnings of a component from say PEAR to Zend, just ensure all the original public methods still honor the previous version and you should be golden. You can formalize these interfaces with the interface keyword if you wish, but that is beyond the scope of this answer ;)

Design patterns for making old php code object oriented

New to php .I'm working on an old code in which I have to add many new features.
The code doesn't use any object oriented features of php5 right now but I'll be using them and will try to refactor important and complex old stuff in free time.
I've couple of questions :
1. Being someone coming from java background,ability to access outside functions from within a class seems so wrong which I have to do in order to reuse old functions. Is this a right thing to do ?... feels so unnatural to me, is there any better way to reuse old functions ?
2. Can someone suggest some good design patterns that can be used with old php code to make it little object oriented and make it elegantly work with new features.
Being someone coming from java background,ability to access outside functions from within a class seems so wrong which I have to do in order to reuse old functions
This has always irked me about Java.
There is nothing wrong whatsoever with free functions. The mantra that "everything must be in an object in OOP" is complete rubbish; only things that logically fit inside object types should be so.
So don't worry about it at all.
Can someone suggest some good design patterns that can be used with old php code to make it little object oriented and make it elegantly work with new features.
No design pattern is going to do your refactoring for you.
Design patterns are not magic bullets; the phrase is horribly over-used, and is merely a way to describe oft-used design conventions. Browse through a list of patterns on Wikipedia if you really want, but instead I'd just write your code in the most logical way and if, afterwards, you notice that it happens to conform to someone's idea of a "design pattern" then... well, good for you I guess!
Here are my thoughts:
Unless you have a lot of testing that can ensure that you don't break everything while you refactor your code to utilize an Object Oriented design, I wouldn't recommend changing the way the existing code works. You can accomplish this by wrapping the old functions into logical groupings through the creation of Facade classes that either pass through the functionality to your existing code, or call several of the functions in your existing code if a more complex operation is needed. Your new code would consist of objects that interact with the legacy Facade as needed, and implement the new functionality using proper OO design.
One thing I think is necessary if you are planning to refactor the old code, is to have proper testing in place. I would take a look at SimpleTest if you don't already have proper testing. As far as design patterns go, it would depend heavily on the goals your existing code is trying to accomplish.
You can simply encapsulate the call of this functions in objects implementing particular interfaces
Refer to 1. This is a general rule; just identify some logic "modules" that are currently implemented through different functions and encapsulate and hide this functions behind objects and interfaces.
You could encapsulate access to the old code using the facade pattern to give you a clean interface between your code and the old code.
I have done this quite succesfully with legacy code that was quite badly written (mine, I'm ashamed to say!), were rewriting was not an option.
I finished with a nice clean interface which could be modified easily and was easy to read. It was well worth the extra effort and allowed me to refactor the old code at my leisure as and when time permits (still working on that).
I an idea more than anything.
If in Java you have ever made a static method such as MyClass::someStaticMethod( parameter ) then it's like using a 'free' function.
That's what static methods are really. They're accessible globally and all it really is is a really long name, but otherwise it's a free method.
You might have put them in a 'class' but really it's java's way of creating global functions in a limited sense. If you think about it this way, php free functions don't seem so bad since their names are shorter.

Simple DB Model

I do not have much experience using frameworks or anything so that leaves me with little experience using Models (MVC). I have no interest whatsoever in using a framework at the moment. I am working on a website and I am trying to model some objects but I'm not sure exactly how I should be designing the class.
For instance, right now I have a class with a few public members which can be accessed directly. I have started prototyping some functions (select, delete, update) but I am not sure
If these functions should be static
If these functions should accept parameters or use the class members instead
If these functions should even exist how they do currently
If the entire concept I'm going for is the right thing to do
I can't seem to find any sort of hints on the interwebs as to how to create a model class.
If you're using a factory class then all verbs are usually instance methods and the factory is instantiated with some sort of DB session.
If the verbs are member's of the entity's class select is usually a static method while update is usually an instance method and delete is usually defined both ways (IE: delete(recordID) and entity.delete())
The entire concept is the right thing to do but you're going to do it wrong. Period. Making a scalable model like this takes a lot more time and effort than people have at their disposal. I know you have no interest in using a framework but you should.
My inference from your question is that this is a low profile project, and you have enough flexibility from your boss/client/teacher that you can build it however you want. That in mind, here is what I would think about when working on this.
If MVC is a new concept to you, then Test-Driven Development is almost certainly and alien one as well. However, I first cracked into a real understanding of OOP while doing it, so I suggest you give it a try. Writing some simple unit tests first against your model classes will take you through the exercise of figuring out how those model classes are going to be used. You'll be working with the external API of each of those objects (or groups of objects if you're not a TDD purist), and that will help guide the design of the internals. Check out PHPUnit for getting started, as the documentation has some great examples as well.
I think the TDD approach will lead you to the following conclusions:
Probably not. Static data/methods are usually only useful when you absolutely need one copy of something. I find in web apps that aside from maybe a resource connection like the DB this is rarely the case.
This depends on what the function does. Keep in mind that using local variables implies side-effects, or changes in the state of the object. If the data you need to operate on should not change the state of the entire object, use a parameter and return a value. It's also easier to test these kinds of methods.
Again, writing tests for these functions that illustrate how you'll use them in the application will lead you to a conclusion one way or another about whether you need them or whether they are designed correctly. Don't be afraid to change them.
Absolutely. How else are you going to become comfortable with MVC if you don't roll your own implementation at least once? In fact, it's probably better to grasp the concepts with real experience before you move to a more professional framework. That way, you'll understand why the concepts and conventions of the framework are the way they are.
Oh, and the lack of clarity that you're finding on what a model class is, is probably due to the fact that it's the part of your application that is most customized. This is your data model and domain logic, so a lot of it is case-specific. The best resource, though, IMHO is Martin Fowler, whose excellent book Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture goes into a lot of detail on how and why to design a particular set of "model" classes with one pattern or another. Here is the online pattern library--obviously the book is more detailed.
Hope that helps somewhat.
When using PHP, I think designing object oriented model adds extra work with little benefits - even when looking on large frameworks, it's common to just use assoc-arrays that you can get from resultsets (see f.ex. the multiparadigm approach of Zend MVC).
While Object-Relational mapping is much more established among strongly typed languages like Java, there are already tools for PHP as well (f.ex. Doctrine). You may check it out if having OO-oriented model is what you want, but be aware that OR-mapping has severe issues of it's own and might be of little use in PHP (haven't tried it myself in a dynamic language yet).
For most newly started project, picking a good framework is usually a way to go - it can save you time and promote best practices (of course after some learning time that's different for every tool out there). When using some framework, you should always try to find out the framework's / community approach to solving specific problems (like model design & data access) before experimenting on your own.
The "correct" way to abstract away data access using object-oriented concepts is a hot-button topic for a lot of people. Put another way, there are several ways to do it and there is no "one right" way.
Rolling your own works best if you are seriously upgrading an existing application. This is because you have a heap of code that is already database dependant and you have some bounds for the necessary refactoring. It also teaches you about abstracting code because a lot of refactoring involves removing (or reducing) code duplication. Once you've done this to completion, you will have a much better idea of how a data model layer should work. Or at least, should work for the way you program. And you will know what not to do next time you build one. :-)
If you're starting a new codebase and haven't worked with a framework or object layer but know you need to build one, then the best advice I can give is to be willing to build one later, and refactor the code to suit when that does happen. Yes, it will likely mean your application will get 90% rewritten a few times.
Writing an object abstraction layer is difficult and you will end up with dense code that is fairly defensive about things, and doesn't take chances. But once you've got it working, you will also know how to build robust code, because it will probably be debugged fairly thoroughly.
No because, static methods are hard to test
It depends of the parameter, life cycle, etc. Impossible to answer without seeing some code.
?
No
OOP requires at least 10 years of experience to have a better view on what is wrong/right/better/worse.
So, if you are not a OOP expert, instead of losing too much time reinventing the wheel, I would suggest:
Use a well-known framework for the technical part
Create your classes/framework for the business/functional part.
(1) Will help you be ready in no time for the classic technical part (Session, database interaction, etc.). Will avoid you to make errors others already did.
(2) This is your core business, it should be "your DNA".
Also, using a well-known/good technical framework will make you read quality code and help you progress. (Be carefull some frameworks are really of poor quality)
When you will have enough experience, you will be able to skip the technical framework part and build/customize your own... because technical framework are usually evil (They serve too many purposes). :)

What is the best class structure for simple php framework?

I am trying to create simple php framework .But i am not sure about class structure for example which classes should extend to which classes .Firsly i am know that some basic classes such as Router , View classes have to access some basic data such as requested url or requested ccontroller and action so how can i import basic data to these classes .If my question is not clear please explain your own experiances and ideas about frameworks.or if you know please talk about known framewoks such as zend , cakephp or symfony
There is no best class structure. Depends on what you are trying to do. Do you mean purest MVC design? Most testable? Most easy to understand?
There is a simple rule of thumb:
Either you have a need that the standard frameworks can not fulfill
or you should use a good standard framework that does what you need.
In the first case the restriction will be the driving aspect in your design.
There are no general design rule for class structures in frameworks. But try to keep this in mind, if you decide to write your own one:
Minimize dependencies between modules
Always try to give default values
Try to minimize the overhead
Talk a lot with peers about it to find flaws early.
If you've never worked in someone else's framework you will have no idea what ideas work for you and what don't. If you've only ever worked with dis-organised spaghetti code, then you will have some idea of what makes sense for you. If you've made substantial re-organisation to dis-organised spaghetti code in more than one unrelated project, you should have a good idea of how you think in building a framework. :-)
If you don't have a firm idea of how you want to write a framework, but you want to write one, I think you need to start with nothing and build it organically. However, you should have some idea how you want it to look like, even if it's something as silly as where you want the include files to live. In other words, all you need is a starting point. Then it's a matter of re-factoring ugliness as you encounter it. Before long, you will have a database handler, a dispatch mechanism, perhaps a data access layer, just maybe even a templating system!
Responding to #MrFox, though, you should be aware of dangerous dependancies. Obviously a data access layer will depend on a database handler; so what you don't want is for your database handler to depend on your data access layer. In fact, you don't want them to have intimate knowledge of each other, either. It should be a reasonably "black-box" interface.
Also, a number of frameworks try to build "one" object heirarchy. This means they think an Action is-a Model is-a Database Handler. I personally have problems with this mis-applied abstraction, so this is a heads-up to not be afraid to spurn this idea if it doesn't work for you, either. As #Tyndall said, there's no one, single "right" way to do it.

Categories