> understand
> their advantages -- often the quickest, least manpower
> intensive way to
> get from A to B.
Damn straight. Can you imagine being the guys who created UNIX 35 years ago
and had to build the first C compiler with friggin' assembly?
> All things considered, can I create a reasonable Java program
> (mainly)
> in CF.
Sure, as long as the Java program needs to run in an environment that CF can
handle, which currently is a J2EE web application, and that's it.
> Stated another way, could CF be a "RADD Java development
> language" for
> the rest of us?
Absolutely not. CF is nothing more than a simplified way to tap into the
power of J2EE web applications without having to really get down and dirty
with them. CF can't do even a minute fraction of what Java can do. That
being said, I'd consider the job CF does within it's realm of expertise to
be pretty good, it's just a very small piece of the Java universe.
Even within that realm, CF has some significant lack compared to Java,
though the simplification that it provides over Java makes those
shortcomings mostly "overlookable". For example, I might bitch and moan
about lack of 'null', interfaces, or method overloading, but I'll take what
CF has over manually making DB connections and creating prepared statements
longhand any day of the week.
> Isn't that the main reason that IBM is remarketing CFMX?
No idea. J2EE is definitely a "big deal", and CFMX is in a position to make
someone a lot of money if it's developed and marketed correctly. I can't
imagine IBM has any intentions other than to package it along with it's J2EE
servers so that I can tout better ease-of-use and RAD out of the box that
competing servers (which only offer JSP and Servlets).
Cheers,
barneyb
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
