your experiences known, but I'd be very interested to know how the
Java/CFML Mach-II hybrid turns out, and what you learn from the
project.
Thanks very much for your feedback.
Jamie
On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 16:13:52 -0800, in cf-talk you wrote:
>Jamie,
>I'm currently implementing a client project in Mach-II using CFCs
>for the Controller-View and Java for the Model.
>
>So far I'm pretty happy with the way things are coming together.
>I too found the incomplete OO implementation of CFCs frustrating
>(particularly the lack of interfaces) and prefer modeling the
>business rules and objects in Java. CF is much better on the
>front-end however and can run rings around JSPs. I've found
>Mach-II a good framework for melding the two together.
>
>Here are the gotchas I've found so far in using Java w/ CF:
>
>- the Java classes must reside in the CF web root, or possibly in
>a classpath defined in the CF administrator. That has a couple consequences:
>1. you can't run your hybrid apps on a shared host
>2. you have to be careful with naming conventions and shared
>classes between apps because all the classes will reside under
>the same root. Not as neat and tidy as pure Java web apps.
>
>- supposedly changes to classes placed in webroot/WEB-INF/classes
>are automatically picked up by CF, but I have not found this to
>be the case. Instead, I'm finding I have to stop-start CF after
>every change for the changes to be recognized. Big hassle.
>Fortunately, I'm used to doing TDD w/ JUnit, so the code gets
>tested pretty thoroughly in Java before moving it into the app.
>
>- CF uses log4j 1.1.3, so your Java code must too. Big bummer,
>particularly since log4j 1.3 purportedly will resolve a log
>archiving problem on Windows. Also, this suggests the possibility
>of big conflicts down the road. If my Java code uses a
>third-party library and a future release of CF incorporates a
>different version of that library, it seems very possible that my
>code will no longer work if the api of CF's version of the
>library is different.
>
>I'm still early in the process of using Mach-II and using CF and
>Java together, but so far both seem promising.
>
>Dave Jones
>NetEffect
>
>
>At 05:47 PM 3/2/04 -0500, you wrote:
>>After having been asked to extend one too many spaghetti-code
>>procedural applications, I have started to suspect that there *is*
>>something to the idea of OO. I am now anxious to try this out
>>(probably with Mach-II, for lack of a better idea), but I am concerned
>>that some of my "OOAD using UML" training will become invalidated by
>>CFCs' incomplete implementation of OO.
>>
>>My question is pretty vague at this point, but I'm wondering what to
>>look out for, with regard to OOAD and its implementation in CFCs.
>>Also, I'm wondering if there's some sort of "Java as the Model" /
>>"CFMX as the View and Controller" approach that I should consider
>>(what ever became of Mach-II for Java, BTW?)
>>
>>Another side question: Can anyone recommend any references for how to
>>go about implementing the Class Model in code (as well as its
>>interaction with RDB-persisted data)?
>>
>>Any feedback, links, suggested reading, etc., is appreciated.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Jamie
>>
>>----------
>>[
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
