Agreed - except MG.. most think Cairngorm is a great framework to, but ..oh
wait now i'm going to get Robin started :) hehe..

I guess with time comes growth, and i don't there is a right answer (I'd
argue there are many problems with the Tooling in .NET). As sometimes you
can make it "To easy" to build and thus you get into a bad situation fast..
much like we had with Frontpage... thankfully that's not around anymore :)

On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Mark Mandel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
>
>> I have no clue as to what the hell Joe's up to with Model Glue.. i think
>> that guy just creates frameworks for the sake of it vs attacking the
>> problems at a niche level. It's like a mutated version of Coldspring,
>> Mach-II and Fusebox mixed with some Cairngorm bits to flow into the Flex
>> side of things..
>>
>
> I'm going to have to disagree with you here. I don't actively use MG, but
> I've looked pretty close at it, and its a very nice MVC framework.  The new
> code gen features he has added seem to be more of a response to the
> utilisation of XML than anything else.  That and the autowiring of
> controllers from ColdSpring is pretty much how I would run with any MVC
> framework, Mii, ColdBox, MG, whatever, as it simplifies the passing around
> of dependencies, and actually abstracts away the implementation of
> ColdSpring from your Controller code.
>
> I don't see Joe doing anything majorly different from, and considering how
> popular MG is, I don't think many other people share your opinion. (Although
> I could be wrong).
>
>
>> I'm not convinced that framework ontop of CF is the complete answer, i
>> think there needs more smarts placed in tooling to compliment CFML.
>
>
> While I agree that there is a CF tool problem (insert stupid joke about the
> CFML community here ;o) ), I don't see it as one or the other - if/when the
> tools come about, then I would expect that the frameworks would also
> leverage those tools, and you would end up in a very nice place with both
> high end frameworks and tools that complement them.  I guess it's a bit more
> of a chicken and egg problem. In the MS world, the tooling came first. In
> the CFML world, the frameworks came first.  I think we'll find they will
> both reach the same conclusion in the end, just from different directions.
>
> But I do see your point about tooling in CF, Adobe have already stated that
> they know it is a problem.  Whether or not it will be solved... who knows?
>
> Mark
>
>
> --
> E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> W: www.compoundtheory.com
> >
>


-- 
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to