Well, Excuse me! Kwang Suh wrote: >>If you need to do something like that you can easily write it in Java >> >>and call the java code from a CFML template. > > > Ah yes, the old "use Java when CF can't do it crutch."
Please don't belittle my comments with such an offhand packaged response. I am try to respond in a reasonable and considered manner. The least you could do is return the courtesy. What is it that makes you think that it is a crutch? On the one hand you're berating CFML for it's lack of vision, and on the other you seem to be claiming that it's somehow cheating to use some of the very powerful things that CFMX makes available to you. > > I though the whole point of CF was to make it easy for developers to develop. > And everything else is hard/takes longer/is more expensive. CF abstracts the complexity away from the developer. Some applications are more complex than others and although CF does an excellent job for the majority of cases, there are times when it is desirable to work at a lower level than CFML will allow. In those cases it is entirely reasonable to write that functionality in Java and call the java classes from a CFML template. There are quite a few benefits to this not least of which is that CFML stays simple enough to be an entry level language that is easy to debug and maintain, while still being powerful enough to be used in some of the largest and most complex applications around. I would guess that the vast majority of CFML developers will never need to write any java code. CFMX already provides them with all the tools they need to get the job done and in the cases where it doesn't, there are quite a few tools out there written in Java to fill the gaps and no shortage of developers who can write the necessary java code if you can't write it yourself. > So why do I want to use something hard like Java to do something in CF? Because you're pushing the limits of what the application server is designed to do. The application server is designed to meet the needs of the majority of the customers. There will inevitbly be cases where that means that it isn't desirable or possible to implement some functionality in CFML itself. The pay off is that CFML stays approachable and simple to work with. I for one would be horrified if Macromedia decided to expose full thread management in CFML. Thread programming is relatively complex and you can easily tie the server in knots if you aren't careful. The point is that all the power you need is available to CF as long as you are prepared to accept that some things will need to be done in Java. Macromedia try pretty hard to make sure that those things are edge cases and don't impact the majority of their customers. If they didn't ColdFusion would have disappeared a long time ago. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:187429 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
