Is anyone extending Application.cfc? I never thought of that before.
It's a fairly common practice in my experience. There are a few reasons why
I might do it myself within an application. For example, I might want to
present HTML and SOAP interfaces, and use the OnRequest event handler for
the
Aaron Roberson said the following on 4/23/2007 9:53 PM:
Is anyone extending Application.cfc? I never thought of that before.
Last fall, Mach-II released Application.cfc support by xtending the
mach-ii.cfc. This gave the user access to certain boostrapping method
like loadFramework (for
Is anyone extending Application.cfc? I never thought of that before.
I do it just to make sure my Datasource, Schema and a few other high level vars
are always present.
But then again, I'm not doing any OO cfc work.
BNBrent Nicholas - There, I guess King George will be able to read that! -
Dave,
Are you saying that you are using Application.cfc to serve up your
headers like folks used to do in the past? I am trying to understand
how you would use Application.cfc for serving up your interfaces.
-Aaron
On 4/24/07, Dave Watts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is anyone extending
Peter,
That sounds like a good use case. I would like to read up on this a
bit more. Has anyone blogged about extending Application.cfc in their
applications?
Thanks,
Aaron
On 4/24/07, Peter J. Farrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aaron Roberson said the following on 4/23/2007 9:53 PM:
Is
I have a question that could be answered with method overloading but
since CFML is dynamic we don't have that option. What I do you suggest
I do instead?
In my service layer I have a method called saveObject(). At present it
takes an object as the argument and does this simple bit:
return
Two answers for price of one tonight.
Dave,
Are you saying that you are using Application.cfc to serve up your
headers like folks used to do in the past? I am trying to understand
how you would use Application.cfc for serving up your interfaces.
-Aaron
For this example, your header footer
Are you saying that you are using Application.cfc to serve up
your headers like folks used to do in the past? I am trying
to understand how you would use Application.cfc for serving
up your interfaces.
Typically, no, but I might want to rewrite request output in OnRequest for
HTML
Why do you need method overloading? Why can't you just have two different
methods with different names? It looks like the methods aren't really doing
the same thing anyway. The first takes an existing object and saves it. The
second creates a new object and saves it.
Patrick
On 4/24/07, Aaron
+1, I support both approaches, but one is saving an object so I call it
saveObject(Object: object) and the other is saveStruct(Struct: struct,
PropertyNameList: string). In the first I¹m taking a well formed object and
depending on my implementation either asking it to save itself or asking it
for
Peter,
Thanks for that very informative reply. I think I will take Patrick
and your advice and create two methods, one as saveObject() and the
other as saveStruct().
@Patrick - To answer your question, I percieved both methods as
ultimately doing the same thing (persisting an object) and didn't
11 matches
Mail list logo
