Well, maybe for a brazilian that speaks portuguese as a native language "we" doesn't have the same meaning and can be used in a wrong maner, sorry about that. Anyway, I just want to let my impressions about CFMX regarding productivity, not the "overall" productivity (we're not talking about creating a complete internet banking solution) but the "low profile" ones, such as regular websites and database connectivity that does not find any "productivity improvements" with CFMX in comparison to previous versions. This is a very particular opinion and feeling based on my day-by-day work.
[]'s Alex -----Original Message----- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12/07/2002 3:58 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: CFMX & JIT - productivity madness Well... "we" is a strong word. I wouldn't really include myself in that description because I have never been a Fusebox person and my coding style has always been more traditional than you would find in most CF shops. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: Alex Hubner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 11:57 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: CFMX & JIT - productivity madness > > I agree in terms with you Matt. Since I'm a Fusebox programmer and a > "old fashioned" CF5 coder i will take a litle more time to see any > compensation on that. CFC are great, but they don't change the fact that > simple CFML code (the one we have been using for 4-5 years) now is > harder and more time-consuming to debug under CFMX. > > []'s > Alex > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 12/07/2002 3:33 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: CFMX & JIT - productivity madness > > > I think it's a mixed bag really. In some cases developing in CFMX is > slower because of the compilation issues. On the other hand, things like > CFCs and the fact that Java classes integrate much easier make > development much faster. > > Matt Liotta > President & CEO > Montara Software, Inc. > http://www.montarasoftware.com/ > V: 415-577-8070 > F: 415-341-8906 > P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alex Hubner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 11:35 AM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: CFMX & JIT - productivity madness > > > > Dear folks, > > > > Since we're talking about CFMX and all the problems related to it > (sorry > > Ben, but CFMX still very painful for me, most of all due the lack of > > documentation) I'm curious about the time now we take for code-debug > > operations. > > > > Most of programmers (including me) simply do coding on the CFStudio > and > > than switch to the browser to refresh the template over a staging > > server. We check errors, watch server behaviour and other stuffs. Now > > with CFMX we have to wait (even on a very fast CPU) a least 3-5 > seconds > > to see the page result due the Just in time compiler. Not to mention > > that (as far as I tested) the 100% CPU consumption on this process... > > This is a very significant reduction on the productivity. If we take > > this issue plus the new scenario of product modifications (tag > changes, > > new features, old coding behaviours, etc) we can fact that CFMX > > development is far away from the CF5 good (and fast) times. > > > > Does anybody is facing it? > > > > Thanks! > > Alex > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ 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
