RE: Forms to CFCs RE: Extra query info

[Ian Skinner]

I would also like to mention that I have experienced cases where the CFC did 
not share the same application and session scopes.  I have not been able to 
fully explore how or when I can cause this to happen.  But I lost a lot of 
development time trying to figure out why an application I'm building did not 
work in parts because of this.

--------------
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA

"C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!"
- Cynthia Dunning



...-----Original Message-----
...From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 3:30 PM
...To: CF-Talk
...Subject: RE: Forms to CFCs RE: Extra query info
...
...I guess I have to see more CFCs. The ones I've seen 'assume' that server,
...application, session, and client exist and do not have to be passed in. I
...usually even see request.DSN 'assumed' into the form. In your example (I
...see
...what your saying about the form processing CFC) this would fail as no
...request from a web service.
...This brings up the question if the overhead of writing and passing all of
...this data in order to encapsulate is worth it or just being dogmatic? It
...feels very much like dogma over use to me, but that's me.
...
...> Actually, you usually DO pass in server, application, session, and
...> client variables into a CFC.  Part of encapsulation is isolation from
...> the environment.  What if I switch from client to session variables?
...> Do I really want to have to go change every CFC?
...>
...> Same with your form CFCs.  Chances are good they'll never be used for
...> anything except form processing, but what if you need to expose a bit
...> of functionality with a web service?  Suddenly no more FORM scope.
...> Oof.  If you plan ahead and make your CFC just accept a struct
...> parameter (which you can pass the FORM scope as), then you can just
...> pass in your arguments from your web service method invocation, and
...> not have to change anything.
...>
...> cheers,
...> barneyb
...>
...> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:07:50 -0500, Michael Dinowitz
...> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...> > This is where I disagree with the whole OO approach and what people
...> consider
...> > no nos. I know that the form processor CFC always processes a form. I
...> know
...> > that a form will only be posted as a form, never as an URL. I know
...that
...> the
...> > CFC will only be used in a place where a form will be posted to. Why
...> should
...> > I do all the form variable validation outside the CFC that's supposed
...to
...> > handle the form? Why do I have to set a cfinvokeargument to pass a
...form
...> into
...> > the CFC if I know that the form will exist for the CFC if it exists
...on
...> the
...> > page. Everything about that particular CFC says forms, so why do I
...have
...> to
...> > do extra work to use what the CFC was created to handle.
...> > A CFC is part of a page environment. Do you pass in application,
...session
...> and
...> > client information to a CFC? No, because you know it exists. Why is
...it
...> > different for Form and/or CGI information?
...> >
...>
...>
...> --
...> Barney Boisvert
...> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...> 360.319.6145
...> http://www.barneyb.com/
...>
...> Got Gmail? I have 8 invites.
...>
...>
...
...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support 
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:190870
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