>>> Ah yes, the old "use Java when CF can't do it crutch." > >Huh? So suggesting mixing VB.NET and C# to squeeze more power from a .NET >app that is what, a crutch? And what about writing straight Java when JSP >can't do enough?
By design, a .NET app is meant to use any IL conformate language. As well, once a .NET class is compiled, it doesn't really matter what language it's been written in - calling that class is the same. JSPs are merely an abstracted Servlet, so I don't see your point with Java. I do think you have chosen to forget just how limited Java and COM integration is with CF. It's not a panacea. The createObject function is incredibly limited, and cannot be used for some forms of Java object instantiation. I suppose as well then that there's no good reason for CFHTTP to exist. Or CFFTP. I should be using Java for those, right? I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for a thread tag in CF. You might even make some people happy with that. Isn't that what you're trying to do? Fulfill client requirements? Why is a person's request to have threading being used as an example of "best tool for the best job", when you're adding the <cfdocument> tag that spits out PDFs? There's lots of Java libraries out there that do that. They're not even that difficult to use. > >Sorry, that argument is just plain silly. No single language or tool does it >all, nor should it. That's why you get to mix tools and languages and >technologies. > > >Correct. But depending on what you are building you may need to step beyond >CF. That is not a limitation, it is good design. Why do you think we >introduced the ability to extend CF (originally using C/C++) back in CF2 in >1996? I am perfectly aware of the reason: Because your customers asked for it. > >>From C, then COM, then Java, then CORBA, then more Java, then SOAP ... do >you see a pattern? I have been saying this for years, and I'll keep saying >it, the best CF apps are the ones not written purely in CF, and the most >important part of CF development is knowing when not to use CF (heck, I >wrote a column on this over 5 years ago!). Well then, I must make awesome CF apps, because I never write pure CF apps. Sometimes I use a database with it! And COM, and Java, and Web Services... > >Hummm, why do I suspect that those who complain most about CF not scaling >are the ones violating this basic concept? Well, I hope you're not talking about me, because I have defended CF's scalability numerous times, and not just on here. My last bitch session about CF perfomance ended when CF5 came out. I'm also a paying customer of the company that pays your bills, and perhaps, if you're going to insinuate something to me, you either say it outright, or provide proof of your statements. I've gotten four companies I work at to either upgrade to the newest CF version at the time or to get CF in the place, so please spare me the rhetoric. The last place I worked at, I got them to purchase 2 CF Enterprise licenses and 15 Devnet subs. I have a few web apps deployed right now in CF, and they work hunky dory, thank you very much. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:187442 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=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
