On Tuesday, Oct 15, 2002, at 17:26 US/Pacific, S. Isaac
Dealey wrote:
Isaac the Butcher of Fusion ... :)
Careful, that might stick! :)
At least then I'd be assured a reputation. :)
[horrific factorial implemented with try/catch snipped]
Of course not... For starters, there are existing
Subject: RE: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
implemented?)
The try isn't too expensive, but the catch can be. However, running a
bunch of trys within a loop can also degrade performance.
The catch generates significant overhead when an exception is thrown
because
was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
implemented?)
The try isn't too expensive, but the catch can be. However, running a
bunch of trys within a loop can also degrade performance.
The catch generates significant overhead when an exception is thrown
because a copy of the stack has
On Wednesday, Oct 16, 2002, at 06:13 US/Pacific, S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
[horrific factorial implemented with try/catch snipped]
Yech... I pitty your server. :P
My Mac laptop, you mean? :)
In answer to Kola's question about try-catch in CF5: try-catch
generally introduces an overhead in every
Hi
Sean, have I missed something, are you saying try and catch add a
significant performance overhead?
Thanks
Kola
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 15 October 2002 02:08
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How
Michael Dinowitz wrote:
I understand companies who have a fear of Macromedia and Microsoft
going away so they want the languages to be standardized. But let me
ask something really blunt. What standard do you mean? The MS
standard? The Java standard?
I think Java would be a good example.
) for performance reasons.
Vince Bonfanti
New Atlanta Communications, LLC
http://www.newatlanta.com
-Original Message-
From: S. Isaac Dealey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:48 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented
2. throw in cfscript
Just to be anal - this is trivial with a UDF in CFMX. Yes, it would be
nicer for it to be 'native', but it would be a pretty simple UDF. I'll
add it to cflib.org if it isn't there already. I'll also update my
include() udf to support includes JSP. This will make it like BDs
http://www.newatlanta.com
-Original Message-
From: Judith Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 10:51 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
I am all for healthy competition, but I'm wondering if
introducing
Regarding the addition of tags to non-Macromedia implementations of
CFML-parsers/application-servers:
I can't see any problem at all, as long as there are new additions they
should just be seen as customtags implemented in the server. It is not
much different than having a different set of
It is not much different than having a different set
of custom-tags, on different servers.
Not exactly. Custom tags can be easily copied to another server. That
can't be said for something that is integrated into the server itself.
So any app that relies on that functionality breaks if it gets
Vince Bonfanti wrote:
snipa lot that I like/snip
3) Any CFML enhancements introduced by BlueDragon are proprietary
and are not part of the CFML standard, and will be clearly documented
as such. Of course, we will be delighted if/when Macromedia adopts any
of our enhancements as
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 17:13 US/Pacific, S. Isaac
Dealey wrote:
There is another way to simulate variables or ranges in a
case statement with a cftry and cfcatch blocks...
try/catch is a pretty heavy operation - you should only
use it for (unexpected) error cases, not normal
| -Original Message-
| From: Ken Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Not exactly. Custom tags can be easily copied to another server. That
| can't be said for something that is integrated into the server itself.
| So any app that relies on that functionality breaks if it
| gets moved to
|
damn keyboard shortcuts...
I've used try catch for a number of non-error handling
items .. properly implemented, it works pretty well. Or at
least it has for me.
Have you timed it? (I won't even start on the stylistic
implications of this!)
I guess I probably should explicitely time test
, LLC
http://www.newatlanta.com
-Original Message-
From: S. Isaac Dealey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:48 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
implemented?)
I've been working _toward_ making my cms application
compatible
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 9:22 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
Vince Bonfanti wrote:
snipa lot that I like/snip
3) Any CFML enhancements introduced by BlueDragon are proprietary
and are not part
for flow control.
hope that helps...
mike chambers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Kola Oyedeji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 4:33 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX J2EE implemented?)
Hi
: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How
is CFMX J2EE
implemented?)
try/catch is a pretty heavy operation - you should only use it for
(unexpected) error cases, not normal operation...
~|
Archives: http
at www.macromedia.com/go/devcon2002
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 6:05 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
Other than the part about a parser (BlueDragon is much more than
that), I
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
Regarding the addition of tags to non-Macromedia implementations of
CFML-parsers/application-servers:
I can't see any problem at all, as long as there are new additions they
should just be seen as customtags implemented
.508.240.0057
-Original Message-
From: Hugo Ahlenius [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 9:36 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
| -Original Message-
| From: Ken Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Not exactly. Custom
Thanks Vince. I know I debate hard but in truth the only thing I was worried
about was the possibility of a language split and the weakening of CF
because of it. Have you thought of placing some of the changes in BD into
custom tags (CFX, COM, Class, etc.) for distribution?
Other than the part
From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
A way to minimize the problem would be for New Atlanta to use a
different namespace (so to speak) for their tags. I'm not talking
something as complicated as XML namespaces, but simply using a different
naming scheme, such as bdforward.
From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
A way to minimize the problem would be for New Atlanta to use a
different namespace (so to speak) for their tags. I'm not talking
something as complicated as XML namespaces, but simply using a different
naming scheme, such as bdforward.
On Tuesday, Oct 15, 2002, at 07:51 US/Pacific, S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
I suppose I should clarify by saying that I haven't simply disregarded
the
original intent of cftry all-together. I do use it mostly for error
handling, although much of it is for custom error handling, such as
server
There have been a handful ( maybe a half dozen )
situations where I found
the cftry was extremely helpful in creating an easily
human read/writeable
codeblock where the only alternative I could think of
would have been a horrible mess of spaghetti code.
Yes, that is true. There are
On Tuesday, Oct 15, 2002, at 17:26 US/Pacific, S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
Isaac the Butcher of Fusion ... :)
Careful, that might stick! :)
[horrific factorial implemented with try/catch snipped]
Of course not... For starters, there are existing UDF's on cflib.org to
handle factorials. :P And I'm
I've experimented with BlueDragon also. I looked at it just before they
released the new version. It's pretty easy to get up and running. I'm hoping
they get a version with MX functionality pretty soon but am still looking at
the V5 version. An application we are working on will need a CF back
: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
I thought I would change the subject to better reflect the
topic of this thread.
Joe asks...
Has anybody deployed any CF applications on Blue Dragon..
How are they working? Any issues?
I've played with BlueDragon only enough to know that is does
://www.evoch.com/
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 4:24 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
For what it's worth, the BlueDragon sections of New Atlanta's web site,
starting
-9191
Fax: (301) 933-3651
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.evoch.com/
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 4:24 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
For what it's worth
Communications, LLC
http://www.newatlanta.com
-Original Message-
From: Mosh Teitelbaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 4:47 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
Not that I think the idea behind the newly introduced tags
what it
is and I'll see if we can get it implemented in BlueDragon.
Joe
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 5:05 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
Yep, understood. That's why we're
-Original Message-
From: Mosh Teitelbaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 4:47 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
Not that I think the idea behind the newly introduced tags
are bad (in fact, quite the opposite
, October 14, 2002 5:05 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
Yep, understood. That's why we're also planning to support the
GetPageContext() function (though not in the service pack). We're
hopeful that if we introduce anything that's truly useful in the way
I should probably keep my nose out of this one. :)
Ah... this is why competition is good.
I don't have a new feature, per se, but I do have a pet
peeve that came about from porting an app written in
another language to an online CF version.
The CFCASE portion of CFSWITCH is sorely limited
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
Yep, understood. That's why we're also planning to support the
GetPageContext() function (though not in the service pack). We're
hopeful that if we introduce anything that's truly useful in the way of
new tags or functions
No, the ZIPs aren't common usage, but I've certainly had to deal with it a lot. Just
used them to illustrate the point. Another issue with the same application was doing
age ranges. Simple to type ''30 to 45'' and annoying to have to type out
''30,31,32,33...'' etc.
What I'm curious about
PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:26 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
Great... i think i am starting to like Blue Dragon, atleast they are
receptive
and want to listen to developers problems and issues
It might be time to look at other
Matt Robertson wrote:
5 lines of code, total. While you could do this without *too* much
more CF code, this is a very simple example. Doing U.S. ZIP code
ranges, where you are selecting combinations of individual ZIPs and
ranges - can be coded in a LOT fewer lines if you allow something
it
is and I'll see if we can get it implemented in
BlueDragon.
Joe
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 5:05 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
implemented?)
Yep, understood. That's why
: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
implemented?)
No, the ZIPs aren't common usage, but I've certainly had to deal with it a
lot. Just used them to illustrate the point. Another issue with the same
application was doing age ranges. Simple to type ''30 to 45'' and annoying
to have to type out
From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Of course, the price of this ease of coding may be horrifying
performance for both CF and Blue Dragon... but you asked ;D
I always believed the whole point of a switch statement was that only
the switch side had to be evaluated as an
Jochem van Dieten wrote:
How much does CF *really* need? Pseudocode:
cfif variables.ZIPCode LT 93711
...blahblahblah...
cfelseif mySwitch(variables.ZIPCode, 93712, 93713 TO 93940, 93950, 94086 TO
95050)
...blahblahblah...
cfelseif variables.ZIPCode GT 93711
://www.evoch.com/
-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:01 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX
J2EE implemented?))
Vince brings up a good point. Certainly, a little
Jochem van Dieten wrote:
How much does CF *really* need? Pseudocode:
cfif variables.ZIPCode LT 93711
...blahblahblah...
cfelseif mySwitch(variables.ZIPCode, 93712, 93713 TO
93940, 93950,
94086 TO 95050)
...blahblahblah...
cfelseif variables.ZIPCode GT 93711
://www.evoch.com/
-Original Message-
From: Rob Rohan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:48 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
implemented?)
Since we are on a wish list, I would rather just have the ability to use
No, the ZIPs aren't common usage, but I've certainly had
to deal with it a lot. Just used them to illustrate the
point. Another issue with the same application was doing
age ranges. Simple to type ''30 to 45'' and annoying to
have to type out ''30,31,32,33...'' etc.
Yea, I'd probably
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 16:06 US/Pacific, Mosh Teitelbaum wrote:
Macromedia's perceived lack of response has been a fairly popular
topic on
this list. While I don't completely agree with the perception,
anything
that allows developers greater interaction with MM (such as a JCP-like
Since we are on a wish list, I would rather just have the
ability to use variables in a case statement. Then you
could do a hack like
cfscript
myrange=;
for(i=30; i lt 45; i=i+1){
devnull = listAppend(myrange,i,,);l
}
/cfscript
cfswitch expression=#myswitch#
cfcase
]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 5:13 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
implemented?)
Since we are on a wish list, I would rather just have the
ability to use variables in a case statement. Then you
could do a hack like
cfscript
myrange
The ability to spawn a function into multiple, concurrent threads to
complete a request in parallel?
Stace
-Original Message-
From: Vince Bonfanti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 5:05 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented
I should probably stay out of this--- oh, what the hell.
I think that a lot of excellent points have been made in this thread.
Here are my thoughts:
1) One entity should own and control the CFML language!
2) Any number of entities can/should offer competitive implementations
of the language!
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 17:13 US/Pacific, S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
There is another way to simulate variables or ranges in a case
statement
with a cftry and cfcatch blocks...
try/catch is a pretty heavy operation - you should only use it for
(unexpected) error cases, not normal
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 18:00 US/Pacific, Dick Applebaum wrote:
I should probably stay out of this--- oh, what the hell.
Now look what you've started! :)
BTW, Vince, I'd like typing of variables and Nulls in CFML :)
Hey Vince, ya wanna see my feature wishlist? It's *really* long!!
In no
Let me see if I follow your second argument here. I create a work. Someone
else copies the work. Because that someone else copied my work, I should
give up control of it to a third person? The entire system of intellectual
copywrite that exists at the moment would cause this to fail and
On Monday, October 14, 2002, at 06:14 PM, Sean A Corfield wrote:
Now look what you've started! :)
Gotcha -- I knew you were there.
Seriously, I do think that without control and standardization of the
CFML language, all implementations (and users) will suffer!
Dick
: How is
CFMX J2EE implemented?))
On Monday, October 14, 2002, at 06:14 PM, Sean A Corfield wrote:
Now look what you've started! :)
Gotcha -- I knew you were there.
Seriously, I do think that without control and standardization of the
CFML language, all implementations (and users) will suffer
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX J2EE implemented?))
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 18:00 US/Pacific, Dick Applebaum wrote:
I should probably stay out of this--- oh, what the hell.
Now look what you've started! :)
BTW, Vince, I'd like typing
now, MM is the only group that determines that.
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:26 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX J2EE implemented?))
Let me see if I
Never! We want it ALL! CF will take over the WORLD!
;)
| -Original Message-
| From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:34 PM
| To: CF-Talk
| Subject: RE: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was
| RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented
language or code... we have proven this before...
Joe
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 9:14 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX J2EE implemented?))
On Monday, Oct 14
, 2002 9:34 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX J2EE implemented?))
You know, to make Basic coders happy, how about:
CFGOTO LABEL=
And to make us C/C++ coders happy, pre-processor directives:
CFDEFINE
CFIFDEF
CFIFNDEF
/CFIFNDEF
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 19:00 US/Pacific, Joe Eugene wrote:
Sean... there are alot of instances.. where we need strongly typed
language or code... we have proven this before...
No, no one has *proven* anything. In fact, other languages manage just
fine without strong types - which
, October 14, 2002 6:26 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX J2EE implemented?))
Let me see if I follow your second argument here. I create a work. Someone
else copies the work. Because that someone else copied my work, I should
give up
standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX J2EE implemented?))
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 19:00 US/Pacific, Joe Eugene wrote:
Sean... there are alot of instances.. where we need strongly typed
language or code... we have proven this before...
In fact, other languages manage just
, October 14, 2002 10:05 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX J2EE implemented?))
Ben,
CFScript.. looks and adopts some good features of Java/C++.. why not
allow CFScript.. to have a strong language type? atleast as an optional
coding style
On Monday, October 14, 2002, at 06:42 PM, Miller, Kevin wrote:
Let me see if I follow your second argument here. I create a work.
Someone
else copies the work. Because that someone else copied my work, I
should
give up control of it to a third person? The entire system of
intellectual
If I understand correctly, the language, CFM, can not (or can no
longer) be copyrighted -- only implementations of the language. (I
don't necessarily agree with this, but apparently that's the way is is).
Can you give a source for this? I'd like to know why CFML can't be
copywrited.
What I
I am all for healthy competition, but I'm wondering if introducing new tags into a
different flavor of ColdFusion is a good idea. In the current economy, when we should
be working to strengthen ColdFusion in the marketplace, I think this will lead to more
confusion, a diversion of the
I agree, whole-heartedly with all that!.
However, I don.t think anyone can copyright a language, only the
implementation of the language,
For precedent, there are lots of CoBOLs, ForTrans, BASICs, out there.
Dick
On Monday, October 14, 2002, at 07:50 PM, Judith Dinowitz wrote:
I am all
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 19:30 US/Pacific, Dick Applebaum wrote:
Rather than have the chaos of Babel, at some point, if there are lots
of implementers of CFML, control of the (non-copyrighted) CFML language
should be placed in the hands on an independent entity.
Well, we told Sun that back
On Monday, October 14, 2002, at 07:41 PM, Michael Dinowitz wrote:
If I understand correctly, the language, CFM, can not (or can no
longer) be copyrighted -- only implementations of the language. (I
don't necessarily agree with this, but apparently that's the way is
is).
Can you give a
/
888-408-0900 x901
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 9:14 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX
J2EE implemented?))
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 18:00 US/Pacific, Dick
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX
J2EE implemented?))
Let me see if I follow your second argument here. I create a work.
Someone
else copies the work. Because that someone else copied my work, I
should
give up control of it to a third person
we should be working to
strengthen ColdFusion in the marketplace,
I think.. we are on the same page...
Joe
-Original Message-
From: Judith Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 10:51 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX
J2EE implemented?))
And to this I have say, so what? MM has the say on what's part of CF
and
what's not. Sun has a say on what's part of Java and what's not. MS
has a
say on what's part of their programming languages and what's not. When
a
third party wants to use
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 20:04 US/Pacific, Matt Liotta wrote:
What happened to cffinally anyway? It was in the beta of Neo and then
later taken out.
I guess there wasn't time before launch to finish and fully QA the
implementation of that tag? A lot of things changed between the beta
and
-Original Message-
From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 9:26 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX
J2EE implemented?))
Let me see if I follow your second argument here. I create
Can you give a source for this? I'd like to know why CFML can't be
copywrited.
I don't think CFML is copyrighted. I believe that CFML is simply a
syntax that is implemented by a copyrighted work. Thus, the
implementation is protected, but not the syntax. As it is, the full
syntax must be
But only one Java.
I agree, whole-heartedly with all that!.
However, I don.t think anyone can copyright a language, only the
implementation of the language,
For precedent, there are lots of CoBOLs, ForTrans, BASICs, out there.
Dick
On Monday, October 14, 2002, at 07:50 PM, Judith
, 2002 10:51 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
I am all for healthy competition, but I'm wondering if introducing new
tags into a different flavor of ColdFusion is a good idea. In the
current
economy, when we should be working to strengthen ColdFusion
://www.montarasoftware.com/
888-408-0900 x901
-Original Message-
From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 9:26 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How
is
CFMX
J2EE implemented?))
Let me see if I
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 11:26 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE implemented?)
But only one Java.
I agree, whole-heartedly with all that!.
However, I don.t think anyone can copyright a language, only the
implementation
:)
-Original Message-
From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:34 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: CFML standardization (was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
CFMX J2EE implemented?))
You know, to make Basic coders happy, how about:
CFGOTO LABEL
86 matches
Mail list logo
