This is an example of why Majority Rule is a really great idea for politics. And not so much for other things. With the right survey group, I'm sure you could get a majority agreement that Lassie was an orangutan. That doesn't make it true.
OO is clearly defined. Armstrong's Quarks give an entirely reasonable and general guide to what makes a programming language OO. Cold Fusion ain't it. Maybe you can apply OO concepts to Cold Fusion. Maybe you can classify frameworks when combined with custom code and style guides/practice reccomendations as an OO environment. But out of the box, CF is not OO. Most people who write CF code are NOT producing OO code. And the people who are using CF to produce something that you could conceivably argue is OO are a minority who almost universally inherited the OO mindset from another environment and then plugged the polyformatic peg into a OO shaped hole and called it a square. Dale Fraser wrote: > After reading a Blog Entry of Ray Camden, in a general comment, he made this > statement. > > "CF is not OO. CF should NOT be OO. And lastly, I pray to God that CF never > becomes OO." > > I didn't agree, I actually think ColdFusion is OO, and thought that view > especially from Ray was odd, then I thought, well perhaps I have it wrong, > perhaps CF is not OO and i'm the only one who thinks it is. So I ran a > Survey, posted to both cftalk and cfaussie. > > The results are quite interesting. > > 1. Do you consider ColdFusion to be Object Oriented? > Yes: 66% > No: 34% > > 2. What percentage do you think ColdFusion achieves the ability to code OO > style. > 0-20%: 2% > 20-40%: 4% > 40-60%: 24% > 60-80%: 44% > 80-100%: 26% > > 3. Would you like the Adobe ColdFusion team to further develop ColdFusion OO > features? > Yes: 58% > No: 42% > > 4. What is the number one feature missing from ColdFusion from an OO point > of view? > None / Pass: 52% > Overloading: 16% > Constructors: 10% > Overriding: 4% > Interfaces: 4% > Multiple Inheritance: 2% > Serialization: 2% > Other: 10% > > That last one was free text, so I combined a lot of dumb answers into None / > Pass and lots of single votes into Other. I consider that CF already does > Overriding, but I left it in the stats and CF8 does Interfaces but I left it > in also. > > But here is my summary of the survey > > Of the people surveyed 66% of people think that ColdFusion is an Object > Oriented language, 70% of people think that the OO features are between > 60-100%, just over half 58% of people think more development needs to be > done and the main two things missing are Overloading and Constructors. > > So ColdFusion is Object Oriented after all, I have always thought so and am > supported by the numbers, we here code our entire application in a OO way so > to me it was a no brainer. You could read deeper that if Adobe just added > Overloading and Constructors that the CF OO feel would be almost complete > but then again 52% of people passed on what the main missing feature was. > > > Regards > Dale Fraser > > http://dalefraser.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
