Newby to Freeway Pro, I try to integrate PHP code in blocks, I thought because we can integrate HTML, I could write as well PHP (I hope my English is fair enough to be clear).
For instance I want to access SQL database on my site.
(Sorry if the message is unreadable, I don’t know how to insert code properly in the message)
This doesn’t work : I get all the code from the sign “->” echoed on the page so I get on top of the page as an error : “getMessage()); } ?>”
This occur any time the sign “->” is in code.
Are you sure your server is set up to host PHP pages? And did you change the Filename on the page from .html (default) to .php? If you don’t do that, your server will parse the page as HTML, not as PHP with embedded HTML, and so the PHP runtime will not actually be asked to interpret the code.
Walter
On Sep 12, 2015, at 4:38 AM, rick email@hidden wrote:
Bonjour,
Newby to Freeway Pro, I try to integrate PHP code in blocks, I thought because we can integrate HTML, I could write as well PHP (I hope my English is fair enough to be clear).
For instance I want to access SQL database on my site.
(Sorry if the message is unreadable, I don’t know how to insert code properly in the message)
This doesn’t work : I get all the code from the sign “->” echoed on the page so I get on top of the page as an error : “getMessage()); } ?>”
This occur any time the sign “->” is in code.
Are you sure your server is set up to host PHP pages?
Yes I am : info.php says ‘PHP Version 5.6.10’
And did you change the Filename on the page from .html (default) to .php? If you don’t do that, your server will parse the page as HTML, not as PHP with embedded HTML, and so the PHP runtime will not actually be asked to interpret the code.
I’ve just done it with no success.
Anyway, thanks for help, I am sure that I’ve missed something somewhere, I am going to work a little bit more on manuals and other stuff.
Thank you Walter, the code doesn’t appear anymore on top.
I still have a long way to run before I could master this correctly.
You guys sometimes have a very interesting sorting order how to challenge web-projects.
I mean, it’s a crazy cool approach to directly fire into the “dynamics” such as php and calling stuff from MySQL and so, but allow me a small note here:
Doing “dynamic” comes from proper “static”.
Perhaps you are interested how your static currently is looking like? Here we go:
You can see, even without php it’s already “very dynamic” - maybe not the way you intended, who knows?
I’ve never seen this. I am going to rebuilt this from scratch.
I need a dynamic site, but I know, like I said in a previous post here, it’s long way to master freeway.
Anyway, I have plenty of time…
Thanks for the info. I have to work hard.
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
What I would do then is leave all design out and start by all minimum required items and stuff. Furthermore start very, very static (center page).
While I’m not aware what specifically you’re after, and while I’m not aware of PHP at all, I’d have as well a look at the forge http://actionsforge.com which is the place for actions helping you out (in some cases). Perhaps there is an out-of-the-box thing such as connecting to MySQL:
Sometimes, it’s even better so seek for “entire” off-board solutions elsewhere (ready to roll php-scripts).
Finding the correct places for code-snippets may be a challenge, too. It requires a minimum understanding of the page-structure. I once did a lil series of videos, trying to cover those aspects. This is the episode about places and stuff:
So if function first - do function first, design is another discipline (that should already exists) and can be introduced later (this is my preferred modular thinking).
Cheers
Thomas
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
For Sitelok, there is a Freeway Documentation which will mean, that you add function(s) specifically to your page, rather wrapping functionality by design. Perhaps the easier way.
Cheers
Thomas
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
Yes, I had a look, and it seem’s to be true, Matt. Thanks to Thomas.
I think I’m gonna take this last option and maybe, for design purpose, the lounge at your’s, Thomas.
