On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 07:53:17 -0400, in cf-talk you wrote: >The architecture is different, so if you want to link you do have to >rewrite. Depending on whether you separated the architecture out of your >fuses, you might or might not have to rewrite your fuses, but you will have >to rewrite your switches.
The reason I wanted to know about FuseQ is I've got a FB3 site under development, and it's done in the MVC sort of way, with a Model, View, and Controller directory, and things are separated that way. If I try to keep it pretty strictly MVC, where circuits can't call other circuits directly, but by way of the Controller, I run into recursive <cfmodule> calls, which is miserable in stock FB3. This is what I thought FuseQ was made for. Our architect is quite reluctant to convert from FB3 to FB4 (which I understand), but would probably allow FuseQ. When I had two cfmodules in a row, in a switch, FuseQ worked brilliantly, with its AddToQ() function. However, when I got to *recursive* calls, it started dying. Can somebody tell me if there is a solution to that problem using FuseQ (there must be!)? Does it have to do with the StartOfQ() function (which I can't find documentation for)? I realize this is nobody's problem but my own, but the project is suffering, and there's got to be a way to do this that won't require me to teach myself and the entire team FB4, and do a big rewrite. It seems FuseQ is the answer (even though it's unsupported), and I bet there's an easy way to do it, but I'm not finding the answer. Anybody have it? :O Thanks, Jamie >If your fuses will stay the same moving from FB3 to FuseQ, then they will >stay the same moving from FB3 to FB4. Again, you will rewrite your >switches. > >The bigger problem will be breaking out of the Nested Layout model. FB4 >doesn't support Nested Layouts natively (and a good thing too). I wrote a >plugin which will support Nested Layouts for moving old apps in,but it still >involves a bit of a rewrite. While FuseQ does support Nested Layouts, it >also gives you the same control with layouts as FB4 (contentvariables), the >ability to capture discrete bits of display into variables and then output >them specifically in their own layout. > >See my presentation from CFUN03 on my site for more info. >http://www.shayna.com go to the presentations area. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Kola Oyedeji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 7:43 AM >To: CF-Talk >Subject: RE: FuseQ Documentation? > > >Sandy > >>> >>> So why rewrite the application in FuseQ? FuseQ will not be supported >>> from >>> this point forward as all of it is now available in Fusebox 4. If >you >>> are >>> going to rewrite your application from FB3 to something anyways (and >>> believe >>> me to take advantage of content variables and the ability to link >>> fuseactions together you do have to do a rewrite), > > >I wasn't aware that to take advantage of the chaining fuseactions >together >It would involve a lot more of a re-write. I wrongly had the impression >from what little I have read on FuseQ that you could plug in the core >file and start chaining fuseaction together. > > > why not just do it in >>> FB4? If you have MX a stable core is available now at >beta.fusebox.org. >>> If >>> you have 5, go ahead and play with FuseQ, but know you will move it >to >>> FB4 >>> as soon as the 5 core becomes available. > >Maybe. We'll see. >Thanks anyway. > >Kola > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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 This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
