Page 2 - Dreamweaver and PHP

I do the same thing as someone else posted. I like dreamweaver for it's wysiwyg feature and to visually see what I'm doing while designing. But as far as PHP goes, nothing is better than the Zend IDE. I have used komodo and Zend surpasses it in almost everyway. But then again, one downside is that Zend only supports PHP, where as DW supports a host of languages (supposedly). Anyways, that is IMO but it really only matters which one you are most comfortable with and find most useful. If you can be more productive in one that is "inferior" to another, then stick with it. theres no use in re-inventing the wheel.

I almost forgot about Komodo, and after reading this thread, I decided to whip it out. I think I like Komodo's PHP syntax handling better than Dreamweaver's. I like Zend, too, but something bugs me about it - not sure what (but I use it from time to time because I agree, it is superior in PHP development).

The guys at Macromedia who develop Dreamweaver just can't get the CSS validation and PHP syntax highlighting right (HEREDOC support in Dreamweaver is nonexistant).

Anyway, there's my two cent's worth (again)...

Hey Bob;
I am a DWMX fan, using DW since 1.0 like you, but I have a problem using DWMX for creating a detail page of php by " go to detail page" server behavior. After I created a master page using the dynamic table in DWMX, I selected a cell of field and went to server behaviors tab trying to find " go to detail page " from the server behaviors pulldownmenu, there isn't one. Don't know why and how to get this server behaviors to finish a link to my detail page? I searched in macromedia site around, there is no any answer for it? Please help me out! Thanks.

Beckmann

Dreamweaver is not an appropriate tool for PHP. Zend is a much better choice, but that's if you have the bucks. You can also take a look into PHPEclipse as an alternative. I really don't think your going to find a graphical PHP editor in the whole bunch though.

Graphical editors aren't all they're cracked up to be, anyhow. I've always found that the appropriate level of code control can only be obtained by typing your own code. Drag N Drop, WYSIWYG, et al for code generation is a bit like voice recognition software - it's not there yet, and won't be in our generation.

There are things about DreamWeaver as a WYSIWYG editor that work extremely well; however like other tools of the trade, it has strengths and short comings. I come from the school of writing and compositing and find many of those same principles apply to web page layout.

OK, for the geeks-gone-wild part, a web site is 90% presentation and 10% supporting code. The average user doesn't know or care what it's written in, by, or how. It just has to work. However, I like to see and use elegant code and also like to see fewer spelling errors as well.

So bitchin' and blasting about text editors being the only way to go because you have really big "coding muscles" is silly. Use what works, use what you can afford, choose your tools, and don't change in the middle of a project.

Blah Blah for now.

Sorry Beckmann. I didn't see your post. Haven't been on in a while, did you find your answer? BobB

This comment has to be representative of one of the least informed opinions I've ever witnessed on Devshed.

You cannot be serious.

Presentation - or, the 'View' component of your application, is definitely not responsible for 90% of a web application's functionality. In terms of a web application's View component, the structure is comprised of graphics, (x)html, css, and javascript - none of which comprise an integral part of the application's functionality or behavior. If anything, the View component is the one most easily scaled back; a web-based application can still be fully functional relying solely on plain text and (x)html form components for its View, if necesssary.

The core structure of any application happens within the Controller and Model components, as well as any external data sources (such as a RDBMS, file system, web service, etc.) and its constituent architecture. These are easily representative of 90% - or more - of a web application's functionality and behavior.

It is for this reason that WSYIWYG tools such as Dreamweaver, Frontpage, GoLive, etc. are not as useful as a robust source-only IDE; getting the 'View' portion of a web application is the least of your concern, and requires the least amount of effort. The application cannot perform correctly unless the application and business logic are clearly defined and implemented, which requires a tool well suited to developing application code. WSYIWYG editors are not that tool, hence why more seasoned developers discourage reliance on their usage in enterprise application development. These editor's focus is on the View component, whereas your application lives and dies by the quality of the Controller and Model components. If your development focus is in the wrong place - for instance, if you believe that your application is 90% presentation and 10% supporting code - your work is doomed to failure from the outset.

If you honestly think otherwise, you're in the wrong business.