>Somebody brought up previously that there shouldn't be a central 'best
>practices' document, as it may be intimidating to beginners (if i understood
>correctly). I can see that...
I really cannot see that. If a person is taught "The best practice" to begin
with, then he has nothing to fear. Following general rule of thumb is a good
thing when coding is at use, and learning it right way the first time through
is by far better than trying to teach an old bad coding dog a new trick or
two.
Douglas Brown
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie Griefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:58 PM
Subject: Re: Best Practices
> OK...let's just cut the name of the thread to 'Best Practices' :)
>
> While there will always be some 'subjectivity' as to 'how' to code, there
> certainly are 'better' ways, 'worse' ways, and yes...'best' ways. It's the
> 'best' ways that I'm interested in.
>
> Somebody brought up previously that there shouldn't be a central 'best
> practices' document, as it may be intimidating to beginners (if i understood
> correctly). I can see that...but I can also see that where a beginner would
> learn the 'most simple' or 'most straightforward' way (ie learning <cfif
> myVar is ""> before learning <cfif len(trim(myVar))>).
>
> My contention/issue/point is that there are almost always 'better' ways to
> code (by better, I'm referring to more efficient). If I can be a better
> coder (which I know I can), I would want to know how.
>
> Yes, one can certainly pick up tidbits of information here and there
> (whether it be on the forums, newsgroup, this list, or any of the cf-related
> sites out there)...but I'm sure very few of us have the luxury of that kind
> of time to look (heck, we wouldn't even know what to look for).
>
> Might be nice to start a "cf coding tips" site...I'd be more than happy to
> throw a form online to collect tips from anybody who wants to enter a few
> (as well as a page to output them). Over time it might even become the
> basis for a best practices doc (maybe setting up a 'rate this tip' to see if
> it really is something that people have found works for them). I know that
> I'd benefit greatly from such a site. I'd like to think that many others
> would as well.
>
> Anybody have any thoughts on that? Thoughts on hosting? I can do it, and
> would be more than happy to...but perhaps a better known cf-related site
> would be a better 'home' for it (i'd still be willing to code it).
>
> Feedback/comments/suggestions appreciated :)
>
> Charlie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sean A Corfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Best Practices (was: Re: 33 and 33d the same?
>
>
> > On Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 04:22 , Matthew Walker wrote:
> > > In this particular case I didn't think the thread had changed. I thought
> > > I was talking about whether the concept of using Compare() negated the
> > > existence of the issue regarding 33d. I was just woken up and was eating
> > > breakfast at the time, so I may have been mistaken, as often I am at
> > > that terrible hour.
> >
> > Ah, the "not enough coffee yet" time... I know it well. Yes, looking back
> > at the posts, there were still elements of the original question but I
> > think I was frustrated by the 100+ ("lots" anyway) posts with the same
> > subject, many of which weren't really dealing with the original issue... I
> > just happened to pick your post to reply to because it raised a different
> > point that I wanted to address... My bad, too, I suppose.
> >
> > > While best practices do change from company to company / version to
> > > version etc, I think it's reasonable to say there is a more or less
> > > established but unwritten set of best practice ideas circulating.
> >
> > Well, I'm not quite so convinced since there seem to be so many
> > disagreements on anything held up as 'best practice'...
> >
> > > reasoning for that is that I hear the same ideas (e.g. use <cfif x>
> > > rather than <cfif x neq 0>) over and over.
> >
> > And as an example, that's one I would disagree (vehemently) with, unless
> > 'x' is a boolean (true/false).
> >
> > If 'x' is genuinely boolean, then '<cfif x>' is the more intentional way
> > to write it (although 'x' is a *terrible* name for a boolean variable! :)
> >
> > If 'x' is an integer, then the comparison should be against zero - again,
> > emphasizing the *intention* behind the code.
> >
> > With a decent compiler, there should be no speed difference - and even if
> > there is, the readability of the code would almost always outweigh any
> > marginal performance gain.
> >
> > When would I sanction using the faster code instead of the more readable
> > code? Only when someone had proved to me that in their particular
> > application, changing that fragment made a measurable - and significant -
> > improvement in execution speed.
> >
> > I spent years doing code audits and writing coding guidelines around the
> > world so I'm fairly passionate about this sort of thing! :)
> >
> > "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
> > -- Margaret Atwood
> >
> >
>
______________________________________________________________________
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
