> > Typically, modules within an existing application are > > linked tightly enough to the rest of the application > > that there's very little to be gained by calling them > > as custom tags, in my opinion. > > Okay... but that's not a description of a typical Fusebox > application, where one of the primary ideas is avoiding > tightly linked modules. One set of sufficiently abstract > queries can power an application and simultaneously expose > that application's data or services to other apps via the > custom tag interface... and any optimization of those queries > (or whatever) benefits not just the core app, but everything > that calls it.
In my experience (primarily with Fusebox applications written by others, admittedly), modules are kind of in a state of limbo between being tightly linked and loosely linked. That is, you couldn't usefully pry the module out of the application and use it just anywhere, because it relies on the data structure of the parent application. I don't find this level of linkage especially useful - either something is dependent on the larger application, or it's not, from a linkage perspective. As for "sufficiently abstract queries", I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that, but it sounds like the kiss of death to application performance if done improperly. I should note that I'm not a fan of Fusebox. I find that, for myself, the burden imposed by the organizational structure outweighs any benefits provided by that organizational structure. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ______________________________________________________________________ Get Your Own Dedicated Windows 2000 Server PIII 800 / 256 MB RAM / 40 GB HD / 20 GB MO/XFER Instant Activation � $99/Month � Free Setup http://www.pennyhost.com/redirect.cfm?adcode=coldfusionb FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
