Correct, I would think the request scope would be better for global variables than passing them to custom tags. Remember that the copying of variables happens for each call to a custom tag, so if you had 40 variables that need to be passed for 40 different calls to custom tags then that is a total of 1600 copies. Although, if you are using quite a number of global variables you may also want to look into using the application scope.
Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Giesenhagen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 10:04 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: local vs. request > > So in the case of 40 or so variables.whatever being set, you like the idea > of setting them as request.whatever and thus the custom tags can use these > settings without having to dupe up on them either as attributes or calling > the preference file within the custom tag. > > I just want it to make sense to those who are looking at the code. > (comment > away!) > > Thanks > Paul Giesenhagen > QuillDesign > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 11:57 PM > Subject: RE: local vs. request > > > > Just to note, there is a performance difference between your two > > methods. Specifically, passing data through the attributes scope of a > > custom tag causes a copy of the variable to happen. As you can imagine > > copy variables can have a performance impact if there is a significant > > number of variables to copy and/or variables with a large amount of > > data. > > > > Matt Liotta > > President & CEO > > Montara Software, Inc. > > http://www.montarasoftware.com/ > > V: 415-577-8070 > > F: 415-341-8906 > > P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 9:52 PM > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Subject: RE: local vs. request > > > > > > > I have an application that sets many different local > > > > variables (about 40 or so) on each page load ... We are using > > > > a few custom tags here and there and it would be great to use > > > > the request scope instead of local just for ease of use. > > > > > > > > Does anyone have any comments on performance of setting local > > > > vs. request scope variables? What if any are some of the > > > > drawbacks of going this way? Resources, speed ect.. > > > > > > It will make absolutely no noticeable difference as far as > > performance. It > > > will only make a difference in a conceptual sense. By that, I mean > > that if > > > you write CFML custom tags with clearly defined inputs and outputs (to > > the > > > degree that you can clearly define outputs in custom tags), the > > Request > > > scope won't be especially useful; on the other hand, you can write > > your > > > custom tags a little more loosely so that they take advantage of the > > > Request > > > scope. Personally, I generally prefer the first approach. > > > > > > But again, it won't affect performance one way or the other. > > > > > > Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software > > > http://www.figleaf.com/ > > > voice: (202) 797-5496 > > > fax: (202) 797-5444 > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
