6 ms·

This list is missing https://github.com/nikic/FastRoute https://github.com/nikic/FastRoute which is definitely worth looking at.

by nubs 12y ago

Nickoladze 12y ago
Dont forget µ which is totally a legit router https://github.com/lastguest/mu https://github.com/lastguest/mu
- insky 12y ago
  Which begs the question, how on earth do you choose one? Edit: as in, which router do you pick and how do you pick one? Choice can lead to decision paralysis.
  - apsdehal 12y ago
    Check whats your need, if you are building up much bigger apps go for a fully fledged framework, rest for small apps you can use microrouters , according to your need, each has its own unique features.
    - icedchai 12y ago
      For small apps, you don't need a "router", period. Routing is done by the file system and placing .php files in directories!
      - krapp 12y ago
        One of the benefits of using a url router is access control - you could have a problem with just letting every file be executable by url, especially if you happen to have a remote file inclusion issue anywhere. With a router you know explicitly what can get invoked and what can't. Although, doing it without a router is probably always going to be faster.
        insky 12y ago
        A late trick I discovered, was that you can configure your php instance to inclued a file with every script. For example the following can be added to .htaccess: php_value auto_prepend_file 'before.php' You can then use that for bootstrapping, front controller and to limit access. Can be a bit clumsy, but it's nicely divorced from simple page controllers.
        icedchai 12y ago
        neat! this beats putting an include at the top of each file...
        krapp 12y ago
        It certainly does. I personally would still prefer a router but I know of a project which was written almost entirely in sprawling, procedural PHP that might benefit from this. Although I do wonder what the performance hit would be.
- leeoniya 12y ago
  the fact that it uses the magic __callStatic probably means it's out of the running for "fastest"
ams6110 12y ago
I used Epiphany last time I needed something like this. https://github.com/jmathai/epiphany https://github.com/jmathai/epiphany Note that is more than a router, it's a microframework.
- krapp 12y ago
  What would you want a 'minimally viable' microframework to include, in terms of functionality? This has come up a couple of times in PHP framework and router threads, and i've been wondering what it would look like (it would probably be even smaller than Slim Framework). I've gotten as far as including Composer and a rather barebones router and telling people to just include whatever else they want but I suspect other people would want more. I find it annoying when frameworks include dependencies I don't want, particularly an ORM or a templating engine, but I understand for a lot of people, that's the point (not having to pick dependencies themselves.)

This list is missing https://github.com/nikic/FastRoute https://github.com/nikic/FastRoute which is definitely worth looking at.

by nubs 12y ago

This list is missing https://github.com/nikic/FastRoute https://github.com/nikic/FastRoute which is definitely worth looking at.

Nickoladze 12y ago

Dont forget µ which is totally a legit router https://github.com/lastguest/mu https://github.com/lastguest/mu

insky 12y ago
Which begs the question, how on earth do you choose one? Edit: as in, which router do you pick and how do you pick one? Choice can lead to decision paralysis.
- apsdehal 12y ago
  Check whats your need, if you are building up much bigger apps go for a fully fledged framework, rest for small apps you can use microrouters , according to your need, each has its own unique features.
  - icedchai 12y ago
    For small apps, you don't need a "router", period. Routing is done by the file system and placing .php files in directories!
    - krapp 12y ago
      One of the benefits of using a url router is access control - you could have a problem with just letting every file be executable by url, especially if you happen to have a remote file inclusion issue anywhere. With a router you know explicitly what can get invoked and what can't. Although, doing it without a router is probably always going to be faster.
      - insky 12y ago
        A late trick I discovered, was that you can configure your php instance to inclued a file with every script. For example the following can be added to .htaccess: php_value auto_prepend_file 'before.php' You can then use that for bootstrapping, front controller and to limit access. Can be a bit clumsy, but it's nicely divorced from simple page controllers.
        icedchai 12y ago
        neat! this beats putting an include at the top of each file...
        krapp 12y ago
        It certainly does. I personally would still prefer a router but I know of a project which was written almost entirely in sprawling, procedural PHP that might benefit from this. Although I do wonder what the performance hit would be.
leeoniya 12y ago
the fact that it uses the magic __callStatic probably means it's out of the running for "fastest"

ams6110 12y ago

I used Epiphany last time I needed something like this. https://github.com/jmathai/epiphany https://github.com/jmathai/epiphany Note that is more than a router, it's a microframework.

krapp 12y ago
What would you want a 'minimally viable' microframework to include, in terms of functionality? This has come up a couple of times in PHP framework and router threads, and i've been wondering what it would look like (it would probably be even smaller than Slim Framework). I've gotten as far as including Composer and a rather barebones router and telling people to just include whatever else they want but I suspect other people would want more. I find it annoying when frameworks include dependencies I don't want, particularly an ORM or a templating engine, but I understand for a lot of people, that's the point (not having to pick dependencies themselves.)