you cant make soup out of spaghetti so if you start off with spaghetti you have to keep writing it. Sure you can garnish it and make it look pretty but its still spaghetti, Unless you throw it out and start cooking from scratch so you can have soup.
_____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rae Buerckner Sent: Saturday, 28 June 2008 2:42 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [cfaussie] Re: CFC Design Patterns Hands up CF people who still write spaghetti code? I certainly don't MVC and OO all the way! On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 2:30 PM, Scott Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I dare you to do it barry. write in Notepad vs VS Studio 2008... You're on crack if you think VS Studio isn't one of the most power IDE"s on the planet. I'll deflect and absorb a lot of crap around being all things Microsoft, but i've meet die hard Java fanbois through to Adobe staffers whom have all agreed - Visual Studio is powerful. Now if it's not your cup of tea, that's cool but "spagetti code" ... you = epic fail :) btw do you ever stop whining about Microsoft? you grumpy muso :) heheh. On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 11:59 PM, Barry Beattie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: is this turning into a Frameworks Vs tools debate? Imagine you're used to using both. if you had to loose one, which one would you loose? personally, I'd rather write code using a framework with Notepad than spaghetti code with VS2005. (and Scott: there's a lot of similarities between the core .NET "framework" and CF's abstraction of it's underlying Java code) On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Rae Buerckner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lol.. Scott you do make me laugh, in a good way ;) > > The difference is the frameworks in CF are about community and are open > source, and Flex Builder has a plugin for CF Frameworks as does the Eclipse > IDE :) Which makes the frameworks part of the tool. > > Cheers, > > R > > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Scott Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> >> I wasn't there but i never missed an oppurtunity to rub his nose in that >> one... chuck says hi btw :) >> >> .NET = Framework that's the zinger in this convo.. We agree frameworks >> rock, we also agree that tools play a roll in keeping the code maitenance in >> a happy state.. point is, if you're writing a framework to keep your >> codebase maintainable when a tool could in theory take over the burden, then >> what problem is being solved and who should own it tommorow (you own it >> today, but it shouldn't stop there). >> >> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Rae Buerckner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Lol... I remember that breakfast Barry! >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Barry Beattie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> a fair point, Blair >>>> >>>> the other side of the equation of course is too much hand-holding that >>>> it gets in the way, either by abstracting too much of the detail so >>>> you don't know what's happening under the covers - or - it just plain >>>> gets it wrong in edge-cases (special headers needed in CF webservices >>>> spring to mind) >>>> >>>> I've still got a great memory of a WebDU breakfast a couple of years >>>> back where Chuck was showing how easy it was to build an ASP.NET <http://asp.net/> >>>> application in VS2005 ... which promptly broke when he ran it and he >>>> had to go back to rebuild it and apply some setting he'd forgotten ... >>>> happens to the best of us. >>>> >>>> >>>> but this isn't helping Adam much... >>>> >>>> Adam, if you're still reading this, revisit the CFC dev website to get >>>> a feel for how important "it depends" means when someone like Sean >>>> Corfield says it. >>>> >>>> simple things will get you most of the way there >>>> - keep your view totally separate from your data access code >>>> - identify the "Gold" code (ie: it costs a fortune to make) and >>>> protect that "investment" (eg: from change + retesting) >>>> - you can probably get away with having DAO's for single record >>>> access (CRUD) and "gateway" CFC's for the rest. At least it's >>>> something. Lots of choices to join up the middle bits >>>> - look at what Transfer can give you as a way to get things happening >>>> quickly for data access >>>> - queries are more convenient (and faster) than arrays of objects, >>>> structs easier to pass around than single objects >>>> - you gotta know the rules before you break them but breaking them is >>>> OK >>>> >>>> >>> >>> > > > > > -- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
