If I implied that FB was the only way to get that type of abstraction with URLs, that was not my intent. However, along with the url/filename abstraction in fusebox comes a lot of other nice things. The entire package is what makes it worthwhile (at least to me).
Think about how many request variables you're going to need to manage for a decent sized application with numerous modules. Wouldn't it be nice to have a framework that'll do all that for you? Especially one that's been proven effective and has great community support, rather than something homegrown? I hate having this argument, because everyone (myself included) has such a strong opinion, and nothing will sway anyone. I make a great effort to try and stay objective, but it doesn't always work. Fusebox has great benefits, and it also has problems. It works very well for some things, and poorly for others. I've seen a lot of CF code that used no framework that was hellish. I've also seen framework-less code that was very easy to follow. Same goes for FB code, I've seen bad and good. Fusebox is just a tool that I happen to really like, and which makes my job a lot easier, because I don't have to deal with a lot of the administrative hassles that are part of building any web application (or non-web app, for that matter). It's not the only tool for the job, and using it doesn't mean you'll be successful. I could use a ball-peen hammer for framing my house (foolish), or I could use a sledge hammer (also foolish), or I could use one of the 500 different varieties of "normal" hammers available down at the local Home Depot. Any one will get the job done. I prefer a shorter handle than most framing hammers have, although I still like the weight. My father, on the other hand, prefers a longer handle. We can both hammer nails with equal speed, I work slightly harder, he hits his fingers slightly more often. cheers, barneyb --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Robertson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 12:13 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox > > > Barney wrote: > >Take this snip from FB4: > > <!-- this automatically adds the current circuit --> > > <xfa name="process" value="process" /> > > ... > > <a href="#self##xfa.process#">link text</a> > >versus this snip from a non-FB app: > > <a href="../products/processproductform.cfm">link text</a> > > Or versus this snip from a non-FB app: > > <a href="#request.ProductsBaseHRef#processproductform.cfm">link text</a> > > Or to stretch it a bit (too far perhaps): > > <a > href="#request.BaseHRef##request.ProductsFolder#processproductform.cfm"> > link text</a> > > Or this: > > <a href="#cgi.script_name#?#client.defaultparms#&blah=blah">link > text</a> > > You certainly don't need FB to standardize locations. Why would you > point to something that's so simple to achieve in so simple a fashion? > I can move an entire web site by a)copying the files, b)reassigning to a > new dsn and c)editing a db record to change urls and physical paths. > Elapsed time is maybe 5 minutes, with 3 of that being the copy process. > In a simpler app this could simply go into something like > application.cfm. > > -------------------------------------------- > Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] > MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com > -------------------------------------------- > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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
