On Wednesday, Nov 13, 2002, at 10:36 US/Pacific, jon hall wrote:
> Thank you very much for your reply, and I agree that cfc's are worth a
> small performance loss. Is there anything that we could do to speed it
> up? Like storing the cfc reference in an application variable or
> similar?
My initial tests indicate that you can get a very small speed up by
using a scope-qualified name (in any scope) and that server scope seems
slightly faster than variables scope. But the differences are very,
very minor.
One thing you can do - if the method is really a 'static' method (i.e.,
does not use 'this' scope or the unnamed scope) and does not call other
methods in the CFC (i.e., it's really just a standalone UDF and just
happens to be inside a CFC) - is this hack:
<cfset objAdd = createObject("component","add")/>
<cfset localFunc = objAdd.add/>
<cfloop index="i" from="1" to "5000">
<cfset rs = localFunc()/>
<!--- instead of rs = objAdd.add() --->
</cfloop>
Of course this is really just same as calling a UDF in the first place
and I really wouldn't encourage this sort of hack...
It works because component methods are really just items in 'this'
scope and therefore can be accessed (and manipulated) by code outside a
CFC instance. And because UDFs are just variables that contain a sort
of reference to the actual function code.
Sean A Corfield -- Director, Architecture
Web Technology Group -- Macromedia, Inc.
tel: (415) 252-2287 -- cell: (415) 717-8473
aim: seancorfield -- http://www.macromedia.com
An Architect's View -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
Introducing Macromedia Contribute. Web publishing for everyone.
Learn more at http://www.macromedia.com/contribute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
