It is better to use {insert methodology here} because of the standards,
protocols and consistency that it provides to all of the developers of your
application. {insert methodology here} is NOT inherently better than a
system that you come up with on your own, it simply saves you time in two
areas. First, you don't have to waste huge amounts of time designing and
documenting your own application coding practices. Secondly, using {insert
methodology here} can drastically reduce the time and money spent training a
new memeber of the development team. Assuming that the new developer knows
{insert methodology here}, of course. Most any deeply experienced architect
- not just a developer - will tell you that any methodology is better than
having none. Developers are the ones that will defend their choice with
religious zeal. As a consultant on many projects using a vast array of
coding languages, I strongly assert that a company that adheres even to the
most simple of standards is way ahead of the game.
My personal favorites are:
Mach II - http://www.mach-ii.com/
cfObjects - https://sourceforge.net/projects/cfobjects/
Fusebox - http://www.fusebox.org/
_____
From: Andrew Dixon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 6:43 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Fusebox
Hi Everyone.
We are just about to start a major new project, well actually a
complete upgrade from the ground up of an old project, but I have been
looking at doing it in a much more structured way and I wanted some
opinion about using Fusebox. We have never used it before, but we are
all highly experienced CF programmers (5+ years). What I'm really
looking for is some explaining of why it is better to use the Fusebox
method than just straight forward CF.
Also, can anyone point me in the direction of a good online
introduction to Fusebox as there doesn't seem to be much on the
Fusebox website.
Thanks
Andrew.
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
