Yes, to a degree. I'll defer to the article for more details and examples, though perhaps others will chime in.
/charlie http://www.carehart.org/blog/ <http://www.adobe.com/communities/experts/> _____ From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shane Farmer Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 7:50 PM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Application scope problem Correct me if I am wrong, but with MX and the Application scope, it is just writes that need to be locked (for simple reads to an array anyway). It isn't as if you are trying to get an instance of a singleton and changing values inside it while another thread is in the middle of using it. So if this assumption is correct, you will only need to add on cflock tag around the initial creation, along with a check to see if it is already there, as per Barry's post. Your reads would stay the same. Shane On 11/18/06, Charlie Arehart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yes, that is indeed old news if you're on CFMX (6 or above). Here's a more updated version of the state of affairs regarding locking and shared scope variables: http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=tn_18235 It's a shame that the older article doesn't point to the newer one. I'll pass that on to someone in the company who may be able to help. /charlie --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
<<attachment: image002.jpg>>
