Counting empty elements is merely additional functionality to current list functionality. From a system design perspective, it doesn't make any sense to duplicate all the existing list functionality and add One More Thing for a whole new set of functions.
It's akin to having a new set of array functions for numbers as opposed to letters. ----- Original Message ----- From: Lee Fuller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Friday, May 3, 2002 2:22 pm Subject: RE: CSVListXXXX (Was: CF Wishlist) > I don't think I like that idea, just due to the potential Ben mentions > for things to break. > > I tend to like the idea of a new function, making it cleaner in > terms of > long-term support. > > Just my .02 > > | -----Original Message----- > | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 1:11 PM > | To: CF-Talk > | Subject: Re: CSVListXXXX (Was: CF Wishlist) > | > | > | Why have new functions just for counting empty list elements? > | Why not > | just add one more parameter to the current list functions - > e.g. > | ListLen(list [, delimiters ] [, count empty elements])? This > would > | maintain backward compatibility. > | > | > | -----Original Message----- > | > | From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | > | Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 11:37 AM > | > | To: CF-Talk > | > | Subject: RE: CF Wishlist > | > | > | > | > | > | Ok folks, I think Lee has just volunteered to coordinate the > | > | effort <g>, and I am sure Ray and Rob would host the end > | > | result on cflib.org. > | > | > | > | I'll give you a hand making it happen if you'd like. > | > | > | > | --- Ben > | > | > | > | > | > | > | > | > | > | > | > | -----Original Message----- > | > | From: Lee Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | > | Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 2:32 PM > | > | To: CF-Talk > | > | Subject: RE: CF Wishlist > | > | > | > | > | > | Absolutely agree.. > | > | > | > | That's what I discussed in a wish proposal many moons ago. > | > | (I think you and I actually had this discussion face-to-face > | > | once. Don't remember > | > | now.) > | > | > | > | Would make it simple and straight-forward. > | > | > | > | Lee > | > | > | > | > | > | | -----Original Message----- > | > | | From: Ben Forta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | > | | Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 11:25 AM > | > | | To: CF-Talk > | > | | Subject: RE: CF Wishlist > | > | | > | > | | > | > | | For what it is worth, those functions were designed to > | > simplify > | > | | working with HTML form fields and the like where empty fields > | > are > | > | | irrelevant. I am neither defending or arguing with the > | > original > | > | | design, but the fact of the matter is most of us use lists > | > | not the way > | > | | they were intended. > | > | | > | > | | Problem is, think of how much existing code would break if > | > | that were > | > | | changed. The truth is it would be too dangerous to change at > | > this > | > | | point. > | > | | > | > | | But, there is no reason we could not create replacement list > | > | | functions. I propose we create parallel functions for > every > | > list > | > | | function, call these CSVList...() instead of List...(), so > | > | ListGetAt() > | > | | would map to CSVListGetAt(), ListFirst() would map to > | > | CSVListFirst(), > | > | | and so on. Would be easy to write. > | > | | > | > | | Anyone? :-) > | > | | > | > | | --- Ben > | > | | > | > | | > | > | | -----Original Message----- > | > | | From: David Schmidt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > | > | | Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 12:42 PM > | > | | To: CF-Talk > | > | | Subject: CF Wishlist > | > | | > | > | | > | > | | Ok, > | > | | > | > | | Have carefully considered what I want from CF, the most > | > striking > | > | | feature I want to see is... > | > | | > | > | | "Stop treating empty list items as null." That is a list of > | > | | "3,5,,,3,2,2" should have a length of 7, instead of 5. > Doing > | > this > | > | | would nearly eliminate the need for any field names like > | > | | name="cost_#i#", since HTML sends back "3,5,,,3,2,2" for > | > duplicate > | > | | text fields named "cost" anyways. > | > | | > | > | | > | > | | > | > | | > | > | > | > | > | > > | > ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.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
