> I'd also venture that, if you use a methodology - ANY > methodology - like FuseBox, your code can be fairly > elegant...
First of all, my comment about elegance was that CFML code itself isn't elegant. This is a common complaint about tag-based languages. The good thing about tag-based languages is that they fit well within an HTML (or XML, or other tag-based) presentation model. The bad thing about them is that they don't fit well anywhere else. Second, I wouldn't categorize Fusebox as a methodology. To me, a methodology is a process that developers can use to solve the problem domain of their application. Fusebox just tells you how to organize your code - it doesn't tell you what that code should do. Finally, I don't find Fusebox applications to be particularly elegant - it's a lot of organizational overhead and I just don't see what it adds, most of the time. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm 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
