Review of the review of the minuses of Bitrix, or the dude reads only the first 5 pages

Hello!

In the Russian-speaking segment of the Internet, there is such an interesting phenomenon as Bitrix haters.
')
Recently I read an article called Bitrix, or Bitrix, in the eyes of a programmer , and I wanted to cry. Moreover, this guy is not alone, he knows by hearsay that Bitrix is ​​a terrible horror.

In this post I will write a certain refutation of what the author wrote, because he wrote a complete nonsense !

So, in order:

1. Architecture

Bitrix is ​​the complete lack of architecture. This is just a set of tens or hundreds of thousands of files with pieces of code that are not related to each other.

Well, no gentlemen, if you really do a review, then somehow you need to get tired and study the system. Bitrix has a conditional separation of parts of the system on MVC:

• the controller is a component (although in fact it is a widget, and in some cases a router - if we talk about the components out of the box)
• model is so-called. API. You can write them as you like. You can divide them into ServiceLayer, into ActiveRecord and other patterns. Do what you want ;-)
• view is templates. Everything is as it should be, there are topics, there are templates, all the stories

2. Code

Below I will give the function of "product". This function is a class method (!!!) of the kernel (!!!) of Bitrix, which is called as static (!!!) and 21 arguments are passed to it by reference (!!!).

BitrixFramework has a phenomenon like D7 - this is a new core . A lot of things are rewritten in it, but of course it is not well documented, but if we talk about comparison, then this is the same thing as watching Yii 1 code, and to say that there is a shit.

Watch the code that was written about 7 years ago and on the basis of it do a review, pff ...

Code examples from D7 (unloading of element names, the number of which is more than 5):

ElementTable::getList(array( 'select' => array('NAME'), 'filter' => array('>CNT' => 5) 'runtime' => array( new Entity\ExpressionField('CNT', 'COUNT(*)') ) )); 

In the old kernel, I would have to write a request with my hands.

3. Cheating

if you chose 1C Bitrix, in order to just pick it up and link it with your enterprise’s 1C standard module, you will fail.

This can be done without finishing anything, and this phrase speaks about the competence of the writer.

An example is easy to find: www.youtube.com/watch?v=IF97A0RtJ34 (integration starts from 20 minutes).

All the improvements are pain, decay, and thousands of programmers' work hours.

If you do what many Bitrix developers do (and they just take the modules out of the box and finish them off), then yes - this is still a hemorrhoid. But who bothers to write your component, as it should?

Conclusion

In the end, it can be described as a product of good marketers who work without good programmers.

Here, in fact, I agree: a very well-publicized system, with very dubious tools for the developer.

The article is written by a programmer and describes what Bitrix has under the hood.

The article about the disadvantages of Bitrix was written by a dubious programmer, at least in the area of ​​Bitrix, who after reading a couple of pages of documentation, writing one component or even a module (but hardly), believes that he knows everything about the system.

If you draw an analogy with the car, the car goes the way it controls the driver . Therefore, all the haters who rushed to dizliche this post, think (if you can): Bitrix is ​​a very popular system, it is often bought, and people are willing to pay for it. So you really shouldn't work with her?