For whatever this is worth and this is for us non-genius's with a little ADD; I don't see how you could compare a well-written fusebox3 with one that is non-fuseboxed, unless it is written in some other tight knitted framework/methodology. The code would speak for itself.
Doug Teel - Web Developer Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. Phone 713-651-5432 Fax 713-651-5246 -----Original Message----- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 2:18 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: FBX3 AND CFMX > I think you may need to provide a better example of > what your talking about in terms of a "bastardized > Fusebox app". > > ... > > I do not know how much experience you have had with > Fusebox, but it sounds to me--and I do not mean this > as an insult in any way--as if you aren't very familiar > with how it all comes together. Not to speak for Andy, but in my experience - and at this point, I have quite a bit of "second-hand" Fusebox experience, since I do a lot of work with other peoples' Fusebox applications - a poorly-written Fusebox application is not significantly easier to troubleshoot or maintain than a poorly-written non-Fusebox application. It's also been my experience that a well-written non-Fusebox application is not significantly harder to troubleshoot or maintain than a well-written Fusebox application, for what that's worth. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
