Dick,
Great suggestion... I would love to see this happen and
still keep it compatible with old code....
This would be the best way to handle this situation.
Joe
> Specifically, enhance cfscript to:
>
> 1) Allow/encourage type declarations within <cfscript> blocks.
>
> 2) Allow constructs closer to Java such as x++
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 1:20 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: FW: Jsp Vs Cfm (CFMX) -- Test Code
>
>
> On further reflection, there may be a simpler way for Macromedia to
> optimize code;
>
> This would allow type-less coding (CFML ease of use) but encourage
> something more optimal -- best practices could discuss the how, why,
> and when to expend the extra effort write code that is closer to Java
> (and can easily be optimized).
>
> Hell, we encourage, but don't enforce, scoping and locking -- typing
> would be just another option available to those who want to use it.
>
> Then, maybe, CFMX can truly be a gentle introduction to Java.
>
> Dick
>
>
>
>
> "The time to stop talking is when the other person nods his head
> affirmatively but says nothing."
> - Henry S. Haskins -
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
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
