to bind data!and there seems to be a lot of low-level machinery in that page just
aye. there is and that's the good thing about it. It's all done for you.
At design time, drag the control onto your page, set some properties (or
script the values) and that's it.
Ah, so that was code generated automatically from a visual tool? That certainly explains its obtuseness! I'd be interested to see what the generated HTML page looks like. I think you misunderstood me: I meant that the code you showed was unnecessarily complicated and low-level for 'simple data binding'. See my comments about Flex below.
No writing convoluted JS and the mix of HTML, server side code, et al.
Well, I don't write JS and don't recommend doing so. CFFORM controls of course generate that for you (just like VS.NET generates your VBscript I'll assume).
the next
version of CFGRID and CFFORM might be getting there too (here's hoping).
I can't say... :)
eg: I've just had a week of spaghetti nightmare where CF was dynamically
writing JS and div innerHTML content at runtime
I'd take the programmer out and shoot them - that sort of thing is bad in any language so you can't blame CF for it.
and besides, isn't there a lot of the same "low-level machinery" behind
Flex's MXML? It's obviously a good idea, not least for the productivity.
The data binding in Flex is very simple and declarative - the low-level machinery is hidden. No function calls, no messing about like the VB code you showed.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-- George Bernard Shaw
--- 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
