Women in Technology

Hear us Roar



Weblog:   Great book: Advanced PHP Programming
Subject:   errata?
Date:   2004-10-15 07:42:05
From:   Vernon_T_Bludgeon
Response to: errata?

I'd love to find out where the errata page is for this book. Been googling for minutes with no luck.


There's something odd (it seems to me) in Chapter 12 about database access patterns. I have trouble seeing the fundamental difference between the Active Record and the Integrated Mapper pattern examples. Maybe I'm just dense.


Otherwise, yes, this is truly an extraordinary PHP book. For me in particular -- at the risk of sounding melodramatic -- it could be life-changing. As a self-taught demigeek with a perfectly respectable non-tech day job, I develop in PHP primarily for fun and only secondarily for profit. I wrote a very substantial PHP/MySQL app for use in my place of employment and have since learned so much, although my app works (yay!), it also sucks (disorganized, spaghetti)and I want to rewrite it from the ground up. But the challenges and complexities are considerable. Now comes "Advanced PHP Programmng" to save the day. It is exactly what I need.

Full Threads Oldest First

Showing messages 1 through 2 of 2.

  • errata?
    2006-05-15 03:55:41  Heinzzz [View]

    Errata (pdf)

    http://www.samspublishing.com/content/images/0672325616/Errata/0672325616errata.pdf
  • Integrated Mapper Pattern
    2005-03-30 17:12:34  jamie007 [View]

    At first glance you can see that the so called "Integrated Mapper Pattern" is different to the Active Record by the construct mapping the appropriate fields to their member variables. However, this to me is still an Active Record??

    I think I must be missing something also. If he was implementing some kind of mapper array in the contructor then I could understand the name but otherwise Active Record?

    If someone could explain this to me I would be grateful. Glad to see I'm not the only one with the question though.

    Anyway, amazing book never the less.

Showing messages 1 through 2 of 2.