We have an existing PHP page (from an earlier project) which could be described as cryptic and ancient. It basically displays a form, catches the input and runs an external application to process the input and then pipes the output to the user.
I would really like not to modify this file any more than is required. Would there be an easy way to just make this file magically work by copying it to some location in the CakePHP's directory and have it receive $POST etc. as usual?
Given that this is a simple form you described, I would simply move that form to a view, handle the post in a controller (possibly converting cake's POST data to your form's "old format" and "forwarding" it to the old page code). You could then redirect to a result page or just output it in the same view. It could be a simple copy-paste job, but only you know if that's true. But if it is really that simple, a conversion is due ;)
I'm afraid there is no way do just "plug it in" and have it working, or at least I'm not aware of any way to do that.
Unless you're willing to leave that form in your /app/webroot and keep it separate from the rest of your app? Anything placed there should be left alone by cake, so I guess that would work..?
Related
I've just started learning PHP and just done with $_POST/$_GET.
Now I want to know, what is the pro's and con's of having the PHP to process the data from a form inside the same file, or send the data to another file (action="anotherfile")?
Logically I will think that sending it to another file would increase the time process it, but is that true?
When I have the PHP script inside the same file, the page doesnt seem to reload when I hit the submit button (but the content changes). Or does it? If it does, wouldn't the only difference would be that I would have to type the script for the menu (lets say you have the same menu on all pages) in both files? Which would lead to more coding/less space?
what is the pro's and con's of having the PHP to process the data from a form inside the same file, or send the data to another file (action="anotherfile")?
You are conflating files and urls.
By having the logic split between different files (and then included where appropriate) you seperate concerns and make your code easier to manage.
By having a single URL be responsible for both displaying the form and processing the form data you don't end up in the awkward situation where the result of processing the form data requires that you redisplay the form with error messages in it. If you used two different URLs there you would need to either display the form on the processing URL (so you have two different URLs which display the form) or perform an HTTP redirect back to the original URL while somehow passing details of the errors to it.
Logically I will think that sending it to another file would increase the time process it, but is that true?
No. It makes no difference on the time scales being dealt with.
When I have the PHP script inside the same file, the page doesnt seem to reload when I hit the submit button (but the content changes).
It does reload.
If it does, wouldn't the only difference would be that I would have to type the script for the menu (lets say you have the same menu on all pages) in both files?
That's what includes are for.
In any language we always try to write clean code. That's why we follow MVC.
Logically I will think that sending it to another file would increase the time process it, but is that true? I think NO.
Because when we send data to another page and on another page at the top we echo that post data and exit. you will see it will not take time. it take time when we redirect/load some html page after that.
It does not matter where we sending data (same page or another page). matter is what is loading after that.
There is no difference about speed.
Whetever you post the content of your form in standard submit, this data will be sent to the server and a response (after processing ) will be downloaded.
The only difference is about organization of your code. The logic that draws themplate of page (menu or other fixed parts) should be stored in some file that you can include separately or call by a function.
Is also true that when you post your data you do for some reason, register a user for example. Is a good pratice that the php file that handles user registration will do that and output the messages and not other functions.
If your file has some logic switches that make it output either an empty form or a a registration message based on the presence of post or get variables, you will notice that when you scale to more complex tasks this will add complexity and make code mantainment harder.
I'll try to make sure I understand your question by restating it.
If you have a form (/form.php), and the "action" of that submit button leads you to a separate php page (/form_action.php), there is absolutely no difference in speed. Each HTTP request (form.php and form_action.php) is independent - "form_action.php" doesn't remember anything about "form.php" unless you pass that information through (as parameters). This is what people mean when they say that HTTP is stateless. It's worth learning about how HTTP works in general alongside the details of PHP.
If you have a PHP script which in turn includes other PHP scripts, there is a tiny performance impact - too small to measure in pretty much any case I've ever come across.
However, using includes allows you to separate your markup (the HTML) from the logic (the PHP). This is a really good thing if you are doing anything other than tinkering. It allows you to re-use functionality, it makes it much easier to change and maintain the code over time, and it helps you think through what you're trying to achieve.
There are many different ways people have solved the "how do I keep my code clean" puzzle; the current orthodoxy is "Model-View-Controller" (as #monty says). There are also PHP frameworks which make this a little easier to implement - once you've got the basics of the language, you might want to look at Zend or TinyMVC (there are several others, each with their benefits and drawbacks).
is it ok to simply point all forms action to a single url and seprate them with a input_hidden for example form_id?
for example we create a url like: /process
and point all forms on that url , and there we seprate forms by a hidden counter
Actually there is no harm in doing that, but if you make different files than it will make a lot easier for anyone to understand.Making different files and calling them will make your code look cleaner.
No, it's not wise. Separate unrelated functionality to different files, and call those, it makes it easier to see where is what. Lots of small files > One huge file.
A few is typically OK, but only if you have lots of different forms on the same page and you aren't using Ajax to submit them. The way you keep it tidy is by giving the forms names, and namespacing each field with that name so you know which form has been submitted.
This is often necessary in this case to reduce the work needed to load form validation errors, whereas you would normally need to keep the errors in the session to reload after a redirect from the processing page.
Example:
-> contact.php
-> Submit to contact.php
-> If errors, re-render the form without redirect on contact.php
-> Else, process the form, then redirect.
In the event of errors, the second showing of the form would be part of the POST request, meaning you still have easy access to the previously submitted data.
If it was valid, you no longer need the posted data as you have already persisted it elsewhere.
This is highly contextual however. It is not a reason to use a single script to process "all" of your forms. Only the ones on the active page.
Generally no.
But there are use cases where it's desirable to do it, at least for some forms. But these forms must implement the same interface, their behaviour is the same.
For example I have one use case where buttons are placed on page, each loads a different form in a modal. Each is posted to the same controller, but all the controller needs to know is that it calls validate(), save(), and render() methods on the form.
I'm sure there are other cases, but your general stand should be "no", unles you have a good reason for it.
I have a website where each person has his personal profile. I would like to have static URL like mywebsite/user1, mywebsite/user2, but actually I would remain in the same page and change the content dynamically. A reason is that when I open the site I ask to a database some data, and I don't want to ask it each time I change page.
I don't like url like mywebsite?user=1
Is there a solution?
Thank you
[EDIT better explenation]
I have a dynamic page that shows the user profile of my website. So the URL is something like http://mywebsite.me?user=2
but i would like to have a static link, like
http://mywebsite.me/user2name
Why I want this? Because it's easy to remember and write, and because i can change dynamically the content of the page, without asking each time data to my database (i need some shared info in all the pages. info are the same for all the pages)
Yes there are solutions to your problem!
The first solution is server dependend. I am a little unsure how this works on an IIS server but it's quiet simple in Apache. Apache can take directives from a file called .htaccess. The .htaccess file needs to be in the same folder as your active script to work. It also needs the directive AllowOverride All and the module mod_rewrite loaded in the main server configuration. If you have all this set up you need to edit your .htaccess file to contain the following
RewriteEngine on
RewriteRule ^mywebsite/([^/\.]+)/?$ index.php?user=$1 [L]
This will allow you to access mywebsite/index.php?user=12 with mywebsite/12.
A beginner guide to mod_rewrite.
You could also fake this with only PHP. It will not be as pretty as the previous example but it is doable. Also, take into concideration that you are working with user input so the data is to be concidered tainted. The user needs to access the script via mywebsite/index.php/user/12.
<?php
$request = $_SERVER['REQUEST_URI'];
$request = explode($request, '/'); // $request[0] will contain the name of the .php file
$user[$request[1]] = $request[2];
/* Do stuff with $user['user'] */
?>
These are the quickest way I know to acheive what you want.
First off, please familiarise yourself with the solution I have presented here: http://codeumbra.eu/how-to-make-a-blazing-fast-ajax-call-to-a-zend-framework-application
This does exactly what you propose: eliminates all the unnecessary database queries and executes only the one that's currently needed (in your case: fetch user data). If your application doesn't use Zend Framework, the principle remains the same regardless - you'll just have to open the database connection the way that is required by your application. Or just use PDO or whatever you're comfortable with.
Essentially, the method assumes you make an AJAX call to the site to fetch the data you want. It's easy in jQuery (example provided in the article mentioned above). You can replace the previous user's data with the requested one's using JavaScript as well on success (I hope you're familiar with AJAX; if not, please leave a comment and I will explain in more detail).
[EDIT]
Since you've explained in your edit that what you mean is URI rewriting, I can suggest implemensting a simple URI router. The basics behind how it works are described here: http://mingos.eu/2012/09/the-basics-of-uri-routing. You can make your router as complex or as simple as needed by your application.
The URL does not dictate whether or not you make a database call. Those are two separate issues. You typically set up your server so example.com/username is rewritten internally to example.com/user.php?id=username. You're still running PHP, the URL is just masking it. That's called pretty URLs, realized by URL rewriting.
If you want to avoid calling the database, cache your data. E.g. in the above user.php script, you generate a complete HTML page, then write it into a cache folder somewhere, then next time instead of generating the page again the script just outputs the contents of the already created page. Or you just cache the database data somewhere, but still generate the HTML anew every time.
You could write an actual HTML file to /username, so the web server will serve it directly without even bothering PHP. That's not typically what you want though, since it's hard to update/expire those files and you also typically want some dynamic content on there.
Select all from your database.
Then create file containing the scripts contents(index.php?user='s) for each one. set the file name to user_id/user_name you got from the SELECT statement.
This will create a page for each user in the present folder.
To avoid having to recreate 'static' pages, you could set a new column named say 'indexedyet' and change it to 1 on creating a file. You select only files which have this as 0. You could perform this via cronjob once a day or so.
This leaves you vulenderable to user data changes though, as they won't autmatically update. a tactic to use here is to update the static page on any editing.
Another, probably better (sorry not had enough coffee yet-) ideal would be to create a folder on a users registration. Make the index.php page tailored to them on registration and then anything like www.mysite.com/myuser will show their 'tailored version'. Again update the page on user updates.
I would be happy to provide examples depending on your approach.
The question is worded a bit strangely, but I couldn't figure out any other way. I'd like to know if there is a better model for doing this. Here's what I have now:
Say I'm editing a user on my application. I submit the form, and it POSTs to apply.php?ref=edituser. Then on apply.php, it has a large conditional to determine which settings are being submitted, based on the ref variable, at which point it runs that part of the script. If it succeeds or has an error, it uses header("Location: uedit.php") to return to the previous page, also setting $_SESSION['err'] with the error code. That page checks to see if the error code is set, and displays and unsets it if it is.
I feel like I might have too much in a single script. Any opinions on this?
Do multiple forms submit to it?
As a general rule a form doesn't submit to a model a form submits to a controller in the MVC structure. The controller then decides how it should handle everything. But if you comment everything well and don't think it is to much I wouldn't worry about it.
Depends on your style. Website I'm working on only uses 2 main php files. Only thing I would recommend is to make sure you comment well
The cons with this kind of system is like mentioned before, it can be hard to keep track of all code in a logic way.
An other con is that php is an interpreted language which means that the whole file need to be parsed on each run. That means that if you separate the code into different files instead of building a big one you will gain performance. But of course, if it is not to big it won't matter.
I've got a website that has a form that the user can type in. I want it to be the replacement for a 3rd party website (Autotask) form with the same fields. Normally I'd just have the action in my form go to where the 3rd party's form points and then have all the same id/name values for my own fields, but there are several problems with this:
Autotask's forms aren't just simple muli-field forms. They import at least 15 Javascripts that make something magic and unidentifiable happen, and they are incredibly difficult to read and understand. So that causes two problems, one that the form takes a very long time to load (5 seconds or so for 4 fields), and two is that if Autotask changes anything at all I'll need to redo the whole form (very tedious and crapshoot-y, and I already have needed to do it twice).
In order to make the load time more transparent, I put my copy of the Autotask form within an iFrame. That way the rest of the website can load separately from the expensive number of scripts I've got to include with Autotask's logon process.
Ideally what I want to be able to do is to just have those 4 fields on my site with whatever name and configuration I want, then send that POST data to my own PHP script, which will automatically (and transparently) submit that data directly through Autotask's forms in the proper fields. If I need to make the id/name match, that's okay. I can use HTML, Javascript, and PHP on this site.
EDIT:
Autotask has built-in GET handlers for their logins. You'll notice that you have a client ID at the login (it will be the "ci" variable in the URL). If you send a GET request with the client ID there and variables for "username" and "password," then it Autotask's login page will immediately forward you to the client page, given a successful login.
I think a lot of people would advise against this in general, as you're kind of hacking the functionality of someone else's app. In this case I only advise against it because they (Autotask) have an outward facing API already. http://www.autotask.com/press/news_and_press_releases/071006.htm I think that you'd be better off just utilizing it and developing something that functions pretty well within the constraints of their system.
one really round-about way of doing it is have your page load a form with some generic id/names. have a php script that scrapes their page for the correct id/names, and the ajax them into your forms.
That way you avoid having the load time of iframing their content in, or scraping their page on your initial page load and they change the id/names you'll always have it up to date.
I could write up a big post that explains on this, but really I think this is a perfect time to let someone else's words do the work.
Autotask's forms aren't just simple muli-field forms. They import at least 15 Javascripts that make something magic and unidentifiable happen, and they are incredibly difficult to read and understand.
Sounds like anti-spam measures to me? If so, then they will probably change over time.
So: follow NateDSaint's advice!
As a follow-up, it turns out that with Autotask they have GET handlers so you can just send information via GET. Problem solved.