Bryan, I started with just plain old vanilla cf. I hadn't done any web programming, only a little VB5-6 and some basic and pascal years earlier, so I was a pretty green programmer.
Well, as I mentioned we had done some terrible things to our CFML code: many levels of nested includes, copying and pasting of code such as queries and display logic, etc. Once I heard about fusebox it took me a while to get a feel for it, but when I understood it, it helped tremendously. One thing that fusebox did that has nothing to do with any particular methodology is it taught me how to best structure a web application. It taught me more about custom tags, application & session variables, cfmodule, naming conventions, logical organization of modules, etc. I think that's one benefit with fusebox for new CFers is it forces them to use some features in CF and architecture that they might have avoided but aren't exclusive to fusebox by any means. I think that as long as you're using some kind of methodology and that you write clean modularized code, you are in good shape. You don't need fusebox to do this, but it helps if you haven't done this before. Craig ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Stevenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 3:39 PM Subject: Re: FBX3 AND CFMX > Couldn't have said it better myself Michael > > Do what works for you and your projects ;-) > > I still wouldn't mind hearing from the FBers out there.... > > Did you start CF with FB or pickup FB along the way? > > Bryan Stevenson B.Comm. > VP & Director of E-Commerce Development > Electric Edge Systems Group Inc. > t. 250.920.8830 > e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Macromedia Associate Partner > www.macromedia.com > --------------------------------------------------------- > Vancouver Island ColdFusion Users Group > Founder & Director > www.cfug-vancouverisland.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 12:40 PM > Subject: RE: FBX3 AND CFMX > > > > Hi, > > > > Actually, I totally understand where you're coming from. I wasn't trying > > to imply that Fusebox is better, because for some people it certainly is > > not. And, you are right--A methodology is supposed to make development > > smoother; or at least more standardized. If it doesn't then you > > shouldn't use it. Given that Fusebox has been through so many changes > > and because there are now several hybrids available that address many of > > the issues developers have faced in the past, I was simply suggesting > > that you re-test the waters to determine if the workaround issues you > > are concerned with still exist. > > > > In any case, you seem to be very comfortable and productive within your > > own methodology; that is all that truly counts. :) > > > > Best regards > > MW > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 3:21 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: Re: FBX3 AND CFMX > > > > > > Nope..ya missed my point....CFMX migration was just an example. > > but now we're heading towards what's better ;-) > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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 Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
