And CFINCLUDEs (which are better for the model).
> If you get rid of the custom tags in Fusebox what do you have left? A
> switch statement?
>
> -Matt
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee Borkman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 3:07 PM
> To: CF_OpenSource
> Subject: Re: Next step
>
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> It's actually not true that FuseBox *relies* on Custom Tags. Certainly
> there are a couple of tags that are commonly used, but while they are
> certainly incredibly useful, they are not essential for FuseBox
> development.
> Not essential in the way the CFObjects' tags are, that is.
>
> As for the scalability of FuseBox tags, that's an entirely different
> matter,
> and I'd be very interested to hear about any problems you have found.
>
> Thanks,
> LeeBB
>
> Thanks Matt
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Matt Liotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > Fusebox itself offers very little other than consistency. The problem
> > with Fusebox and almost every other CF methodology is that it relies
> on
> > custom tags which don't scale.
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
