On 2003.01.30, Peter M. Jansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Again, from an ease-of-use standpoint, AOLserver has a hard time > competing with CF.
Being that I've been developing in CF for years now, including an e-commerce site built entirely in CF, I definitely agree with everything you said that I've snipped above. > Now, if the app tests the boundaries of CF, you start to get a fighting > chance with AOLserver, because AOLserver has finer-grained APIs, and you > can adapt an AOLserver to fit your problem, where, with CF, you'll end up > doing more fitting your problem to CF. Even here, CF trumps AOLserver for the most part. We needed a specialized handler for a custom inter-application communication protocol which was XML based. I simply spent a few hours writing a parser and generator that linked to Xerces-C++ and wrote a custom CFX tag in C++ for ColdFusion. IMHO, in 2003, since ColdFusion 5.x introduced UDFs (user-defined functions), CF5 is finally an attractive app. development platform. I am, however, seriously displeased that the next version after 5.x, CFMX, is based on some Java runtime inside a J2EE engine. Very disappointed -- I suspect the quality of the CF server to seriously go downhill after this maneuver. I once started writing a CFML parser and runtime in Perl so I could run CF apps under Apache on Linux (before Macromedia actually ported to Linux). I may do the same thing -- write a CFML parser and runtime in Tcl -- so I could run CF under AOLserver. As I said to Scott offlist, I did write a custom CFX tag, called CFX_TCL, that lets you evaluate Tcl code from your CF app. I'm going to hell for it, I know ... -- Dossy -- Dossy Shiobara mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Panoptic Computer Network web: http://www.panoptic.com/ "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)
