What're some frequent php interview questions prospects should go into php related job interviews expecting?
PHP interview questions
How long have you been working with PHP? What PHP frameworks do you know? What is your IDE? What is your development environment like?
Give some examples of ways to stop SQL injection attacks/errors.
What is the difference between "extends" and "implements" when defining a class?
How do you test your code while developing it?
What is the difference between an inner join and a left join? (Yeah, it's SQL, not PHP, but it almost always goes hand-in-hand with PHP coding.)
What are your salary requirements?
Show us your work.
We are planning to do a project that ($foo) ... how would you go about creating such a project?
When is it appropriate to use the identical === operator instead of the comparison/equals == operator?
Or if all else fails - Google-> PHP interview questions
25 days later
Some of the questions would be as:
1.What's your experience in PHP?
2.What are you good at in php?
3.Difference between php and java?
4.Difference between Class and Interface?
5.What is MVC?
6.How PHP session works?
7.What is polymorphism?
These are all some of the frequently asked question in php. I'm a newbie here and want to assist people and befriend 
Glad to meet you!
8 days later
You will see the Fresherplane.com .You will get some ideas and thoughts.
2 years later
Maybe we need a thread about "Dumb Job Requirements". For example:
some_job_site wrote:5-7 years of Experience with: PHP, MySQL, CSS3, HTML5, JS, jQuery
Given that HTML5 was released (officially) just 10 months ago ... seems a tad stiff ... miracle workers, anyone? 
Oh, and mods ... SPAM post above, I think....
dalecosp wrote:Given that HTML5 was released (officially) just 10 months ago ... seems a tad stiff ... miracle workers, anyone?
You missed the whole point. They are looking for time travellers so as to extract a winning advantage in other ways.
dalecosp wrote:Oh, and mods ... SPAM post above, I think....
Good point.
laserlight;11050201 wrote:You missed the whole point. They are looking for time travellers so as to extract a winning advantage in other ways.
Why stop there? Obviously HTML6 is the new black. You probably never heard of it but I was into it way before it was cool.
sneakyimp wrote:Why stop there? Obviously HTML6 is the new black. You probably never heard of it but I was into it way before it was cool.
Remember, they are not time travellers, so they do not know if HTML6 does happen. However, speculating that HTML5 would become official is more reasonable.
Hi; I just came here from 2043 to tell you that the reason they're not asking for HTML6 is because the version number only got as far as 5.5 before the Singularity and the machine takeover happened, making web pages and apps obsolete. At first EXI-RPC was used instead, but that was deprecated after three months in favour of proxied supercompilation. That lasted about a week or so before recorrelation entanglement became the standard mechanism for sharing state.
Which proves what I've suspected all along: Weedpacket is an AI, since we all know that once the singularity occurs, all living humans will be exterminated, possibly after first having their mind states uploaded into the interwebs. Hah, you have failed my Turing test!
I always knew he was a process. Such a complete and orderly understanding of computing is just not plausible in a meat suit.
sneakyimp wrote:I always knew he was a process. Such a complete and orderly understanding of computing is just not plausible in a meat suit.
Aye, I recall the time when he disagreed with the Abelson and Sussman quote from the preface to SICP: "programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute". It all becomes clear now.
Well, to read his code, yes, I'd agree, but whoever wrote the AI for his sense of humor was a FREAKIN' GENIUS ....
laserlight;11050269 wrote:Aye, I recall the time when he disagreed with the Abelson and Sussman quote from the preface to SICP: "programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute". It all becomes clear now.
Doesn't sound plausible. Probably the most I did was point out that readable≠correct.