James,
I think most people who use UD also rely on CF Studio to hand code. The two
go well together but you wouldn't want to rely on UD exclusively. I really
like UD, but there are a few issues:
1) It's a script based tool. That means that unless you know cfscript it can
be very hard to debug the code it generates.
2) In some instances UD can rewrite your CF. For example, UD will move a
CFOUTPUT tag out of the Head.
3) UD doesn't always parse CF correctly. For instance, there's an extension
at macromedia that lets UD understand CFINCLUDE and show the content on the
page while you're working. But if you build a simple CFELSE statement to
include a file if it exists, otherwise include a default file, UD won't
understand it and will show both files included in design mode.
For visually designing relatively simple CF pages though, UD is great. The
live data mode lets you see the results of a query on your page while you
design it -- I think that makes it worth the price of purchase alone. Post
your question to the macromedia.ultradev group and you'll get some responses
from people who have spent a bit more time with the issues than I have.
Regards,
Marc Garrett
"James Taavon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I am reading the white paper on Dreamweaver UltraDev 4. So far, so good
> I like what I am reading. Are there any pitfalls that I shold be aware
> of if I decide to purchase this package?
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
