Yeah figured. Well I was fighting the search engine game, and some people helped me get past that to where I could do some solid coding. I'm not saying hold my hand, but Pont me in the right direction. Where's you white paper on architecture and development? Where's your best practices piece? I'm not trying to be a prick, I'm trying to say two things basically:
1. You don't know much about FB. It's obvious in how you talk about it. Before I decided on FB I looked at cfobjects, and smartobjects, and blackbox. FB was better as far as I was concerned. Please ask questions about it. Look into it. But don't slam it just because you "said so". We are all adults. If you have real criticisms then come with. Is the core file to slow? Does it prohibit you from doing something? Is there a better way of doing something it does? I would be happy to hear it. 2. I guess this also ties into part one. Practice what you preach. You don't think Hal and Steve and all the rest are dong something that is good for coders? Do something better. Send in some links, something besides complain. I have helped write sample apps, put out UDFs, written a small description paper on the available FB api. It's what I work with. I tell you this. If someone shows me a better way to write CF I will scream it from the mountain tops, and I will dedicate my personal time and money, first becoming proficient in it, and then passing it on to those who can use it. Why? Because its how we as a community get better. Why does CF have a bad rap? Because there's a lot of bad CF out there, and a lot of misinformation. Well I see a lot of misinformation about FB as well. Damn I really need to get this in digest mode so I can get some work done :) Tim Heald ACP/CCFD Application Development www.schoollink.net -----Original Message----- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 11:59 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) What do you want? Want me to list everything I expect in an architecture and application framework to show that Fusebox provides known of them? You don't really need me for that. Go to Google and do a search on software architecture and application frameworks. You will find an amazing amount of infrastructure that Fusebox is no where near providing. You may even discover the true definitions for some of the terms Fusebox has bastardized. -Matt > -----Original Message----- > From: Ken Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 8:56 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Fusebox (was: I like CFMX) > > >> So do tell, in detail if you please, what you find > >> objectionable about it. > > > I don't use Fusebox because it does nothing for me. > > > Uh huh. Most enlightening detail there Matt. > > ______________________________________________________________________ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.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
