I'm sorry, I fail to see what the heated argument is about. We have always known there are self-serving purists out there that do not like Cold Fusion because of all of its highly competitive and productive qualities when it comes to delivering robust web applications.
Fact is that Cold Fusion is many things that are not mutually exclusive. It is a web applications server, it is also a framework, and it can be programmed using several 'languages' (or variants or dialects - whatever you like). CFML, CFSCRIPT/ECMAScript, Actionscript to name the main ones. It fulfills the broad definition of a programming language (given in the wikipedia link in an earlier reply). It has a rich function library that is the main reason it is so productive when it comes to building real world applications. It can be extended by writing programs in other languages, - Java, C+ + , C^ and such extensions effectively become a part of the libraries that form the language. Most modern computer languages are based upon libraries, which themselves are often written using other languages (such as assembler at the most basic level). The original link uses a somewhat purist approach re 'Turing Complete' that appears to be invalid in that a programming language does not have to be turing complete to be a language. The term Turing complete refers to an ability in a programming system to solve every problem in the universe (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_completeness) and generally irrelevant when describing a programming language. There is no case for eleiminating Cold Fusion from a list of computer languages in common use, as the facts speak otherwise. One therefore calls into question the process used to compile the TIOBE list and suggest that perhaps it may be somewhat less than objective. Ot perhaps its mission is not clearly defined. When I searched, I was unable to find an original representation of the said TIOBE list so if anyone can point me to it I'd be grateful. It appears this list wants to deliver a ranking order of popularity of various means to deliver web applications. Since CF is clearly such a means it belongs on the list. End of story. No need for an internal debate/fight among CF programmers dismayed at possibly a losss of prestige, we should be discussing the means necessary to set TIOBE right, that is, assuming said TIOBE list matters at all to anyone except the analy retentive few that want to argue the finer points. FWIW, Bryn Parrott On May 5, 2:31 pm, Peter Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Has anyone else seen anything about this?! > > http://www.pbell.com/index.cfm/2008/5/5/ColdFusion-Isnt-a-Programming... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
