Comments on: Zend and the Adobe Flash Platform eSeminar http://wadearnold.com/blog/flash/zend-and-the-adobe-flash-platform-eseminar The spoils of the integration of PHP and ActionScript Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:17:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Antonia Natural Beauty Tips http://wadearnold.com/blog/flash/zend-and-the-adobe-flash-platform-eseminar/comment-page-1#comment-591 Antonia Natural Beauty Tips Wed, 10 Dec 2008 06:27:48 +0000 http://wadearnold.com/blog/?p=166#comment-591 Wade, It is good to hear that Lee Brimelow will be guiding developers on creating a flex application (PHP+Zend). I have been a regular follower of Lee’s blog and have viewed several tutorials made by him. I think Zend is awesome too, and with Adobe contributing to RIA development, we can certainly expect a better internet experience! Wade,

It is good to hear that Lee Brimelow will be guiding developers on creating a flex application (PHP+Zend). I have been a regular follower of Lee’s blog and have viewed several tutorials made by him.

I think Zend is awesome too, and with Adobe contributing to RIA development, we can certainly expect a better internet experience!

]]> By: Zachary Schneider http://wadearnold.com/blog/flash/zend-and-the-adobe-flash-platform-eseminar/comment-page-1#comment-571 Zachary Schneider Mon, 08 Dec 2008 00:26:46 +0000 http://wadearnold.com/blog/?p=166#comment-571 Hi Wade, Would it be possible for you to update the Zend_AMF documentation to cover how your lazy directory loader works with flex in respect to remoteobject? I found this to be a bit of stumbling block. I ended up with a perfect setup (thanks a bunch) however trying to figure out the proper source attribute in remoteobject with the . or _ notation and the corresponding class names and directory structure in php was a little frustrating. I think I was probably misapplying the definition. A little elaboration would help immensely. Or perhaps a longer description of the difference between the 2 notations and the class names and directories used. I would send an update myself however I wasn't able to setup a working example for the . notation. Thanks Again! Hi Wade,

Would it be possible for you to update the Zend_AMF documentation to cover how your lazy directory loader works with flex in respect to remoteobject?

I found this to be a bit of stumbling block. I ended up with a perfect setup (thanks a bunch) however trying to figure out the proper source attribute in remoteobject with the . or _ notation and the corresponding class names and directory structure in php was a little frustrating.

I think I was probably misapplying the definition. A little elaboration would help immensely. Or perhaps a longer description of the difference between the 2 notations and the class names and directories used.

I would send an update myself however I wasn’t able to setup a working example for the . notation.

Thanks Again!

]]> By: Alograg http://wadearnold.com/blog/flash/zend-and-the-adobe-flash-platform-eseminar/comment-page-1#comment-553 Alograg Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:18:45 +0000 http://wadearnold.com/blog/?p=166#comment-553 Hello Wade; I believe the work you're doing in Zend_Amf is excellent. But do not think that those leaving aside the design goals of AMFPHP: - Quick installation and implementation - Nothing required - PHP4/PHP5 compatible, no extensions needed - Low footprint, lightweight, fast - Convention over configuration (service and class mapping) - Can be embedded into a framework (see CakeAmfphp, Seagull) - Services are "non-specific" PHP classes that are portable to anything without code change - Productivity tools included (service browser, code gen, profiling) - Batteries included - XML-RPC, JSON - Not a framework by itself (use your own) - Examples - Mimic the AMF specification I think that some of these goals are being ignored when they entered the Zend draft. I really think that AMFPHP can be more powerful than any other implemented in a framework. Do not get me wrong, work in Zend_Amf is promising and with a great vision. But a different view to that of the creator of AMFPHP. I just see comments like: "Congratulations", "will be hoping that" and so on. I tell you: I help with AMFPHP (on everything: site, code, etc.). Only tell me what you need and how we organize ourselves. It may be a noob in team work, but I feel good in the development of PHP and AS. PS: Excuse my poor English. I'm Mexican. Hello Wade;
I believe the work you’re doing in Zend_Amf is excellent. But do not think that those leaving aside the design goals of AMFPHP:
- Quick installation and implementation
- Nothing required – PHP4/PHP5 compatible, no extensions needed
- Low footprint, lightweight, fast
- Convention over configuration (service and class mapping)
- Can be embedded into a framework (see CakeAmfphp, Seagull)
- Services are “non-specific” PHP classes that are portable to anything without code change
- Productivity tools included (service browser, code gen, profiling)
- Batteries included – XML-RPC, JSON
- Not a framework by itself (use your own)
- Examples
- Mimic the AMF specification
I think that some of these goals are being ignored when they entered the Zend draft. I really think that AMFPHP can be more powerful than any other implemented in a framework.
Do not get me wrong, work in Zend_Amf is promising and with a great vision. But a different view to that of the creator of AMFPHP.
I just see comments like: “Congratulations”, “will be hoping that” and so on. I tell you: I help with AMFPHP (on everything: site, code, etc.). Only tell me what you need and how we organize ourselves. It may be a noob in team work, but I feel good in the development of PHP and AS.
PS: Excuse my poor English. I’m Mexican.

]]>