> >Hmm, so it's not meant to grow and become some sort of a >coding standard/framework? >Is it just a bone for the hungry at the moment? ;-) >
It's supposed to give you enough structure to take some of the more mundane decisions out of your life, but give you the freedom and flexibility to be your own boss where you want. In that sense, go right ahead and stick some password protection on the application scope refresh. For the apps I'm building at the minute, I use 4 application modes: debug and development - Application scope is reloaded on every request testing - Application scope is refreshed using a url variable live - You can't force the application scope to be refreshed. That just happens to be what suits me right now for the apps I'm developing, but by all means use your own ideas. It's not meant to be a rule book that tells you how you _must_ do things. It's supposed to be more of a guide to how to structure your applications. The important thing is that the framework doesn't get bogged down in the details of how to implement a specific piece of functionality rather that it gives you some tools and ideas that make building apps faster and more structured. With that in mind, there are still some things that you _have_ to do when using Batfink because otherwise you'd just be writing code and not using a framework at all. I also hesitate when calling Batfink a 'framework' because it provides very little in the way of pre-written modules or code, but does require that you structure your applications in a particular way. I've stuck a blurb on http://www.spike.org.uk about it and am happy to discuss it with anyone by email, or on IM ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) as long as that doesn't get in the way of work that someone's paying me to do. Spike --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MXDU2004 + Macromedia DevCon AsiaPac + Sydney, Australia http://www.mxdu.com/ + 24-25 February, 2004
