> actually, to take 'gel's point one step further, the > certfication game is crap. a lot of questions out there (no > specifics, of course) would be quite answerable by RTFM. the > fact that certifications don't really indicate the ABILITY to > learn, but rather, the ability to memorize the way ONE group > wants a certain procedure done.
I completely agree with this - being "book smart" and knowing all of the tags/functions/whatever DOES NOT make you a good developer - being able to thing slightly "outside the box" is always a good help, but you can't test for that I myself am forever looking up stupid little things like the order of the parameters, but I consider myself a good CF developer... Also the test assumes that you use ALL of CF - we don't use things like WDDX, Application variables, we've only just started using CFGraph (and it sucks) - there's LOADS of things we know loads about, but some we know bugger all about - does this mean we're bad developers? I don't think so It's rather like the M$ tests, they don't test "real world" environments, only what you know from the books Philip Arnold Technical Director Certified ColdFusion Developer ASP Multimedia Limited Switchboard: +44 (0)20 8680 8099 Fax: +44 (0)20 8686 7911 www.aspmedia.co.uk www.aspevents.net An ISO9001 registered company. ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. ********************************************************************** ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
