Not only that, but because CFMX is now compiled to a Java class, there is
always scope for optimisations to be applied post the actual coding - and
these mechanisms could change even between upgrades. �Just the fact that
you aren't parsing and then executing the code will have a big
difference. �Then it is just a matter of how good the CFMX->Java
compilation/optimisation is.
Gary Menzel
IT Operations Brisbane -+- ABN AMRO Morgans Limited
Level 29, 123 Eagle Street BRISBANE QLD 4000
PH: 07 333 44 828 �FX: �07 3834 0828
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/24/2003 08:12:12 AM:
> Steve Onnis wrote:
> > Does anyone know where I can find information on best practices for
code?
>
> We supplemented our intenal guidelines with good material from:
> � �http://www.corfield.org/coldfusion/codingStandards.htm
>
> It's worth noting that comparisons of things like:
> Poor � <cfif username is not "">
> Better �<cfif len(trim(username))>
>
> Can often be very subjective... if you are looking at comparisons for
> purely performance reasons you should be aware that there are many
> examples of good performers in CF5 that are bad performers in CFMX.
>
> For example, list manipulation in CFMX is often not as fast as CF5 but
> then array functions are vastly superior in CFMX.
>
> -- geoff
> http://www.daemon.com.au/
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> MX Downunder AsiaPac DevCon - http://mxdu.com/
---
You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MX Downunder AsiaPac DevCon - http://mxdu.com/
