On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 15:43:22 +1000, Scott Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So your basically recommending a developer go learn another language > that *is* OOP, then come back to Coldfusion MX which *isn't* and apply > the same fundamentals you have learnt with your "is a" langauge to one > that "isn't a" but "has" some concepts that touch on OOP?
Yeah, pretty much - minus the sarcasm, of course... > Just so they > can feel good in their approach to OO style of development within CFMX? > kind of like a OOP Facade in many ways? No, so they can effectively use the OO principles... > Or you could end up conjuring up theories on how to make CFMX suite OOP > concepts, but get more and more annoyed at how the pieces of the puzzles > aren't fitting correctly - thus end up re-creating a framework that > smells like an OOP based one but deep down you resent it for not being > infact one. Not if you really "get" it. My team is mostly C++ / Java folks with a long OO history and we accept CF has limitations but we still get to bring almost all of our past experience to bear on CFMX... > Sorry, i think its funny how OOP programmers preech to CFMX programmers > with a level of contempt, simply due to the fact they started out as > procedure based gumby. I didn't see anything in Mark's comments that sounded like contempt for CF programmers. Sure he had some general issues with programmers at large but they are valid issues for the most part. > If i were to start tommorow on learning OOP and someone said to me go > learn JAVA/C# etc first, then come back to CFMX and apply that same > level of education to it? i'd ask the question "why".. I'd be more > inclined to shift my hardcore logic into <insert your language> and keep > the fluffy stuff / facade in CFMX. I'd hope they'd give you a good answer and you'd realize why doing most everything in CFMX was still the most productive solution. Look, I've been doing software for nearly 25 years commercially. I've been doing OO stuff for over 12 years. So I was a "procedural gumby" when I started... in fact for over a dozen years. And my early attempts at OO sucked too, I can tell you! But the language you use to learn defines the scope of what you will learn. If you try to learn a technique in a language that doesn't support it well, you will have a hard time learning the technique... Which is why I always advocate multi-lingual learning. > That way i'm not pissing my time up against the wall making a language > do something its not capable of doing. CF is perfectly capable of doing almost all of what you might want but it isn't the best teaching language for all of this stuff - once you really understand the techniques, you can apply them to almost any language. > Thats just me though - 1 Dreamweaver snippets master who has yet to > experience the godly touch of a *real* OOP language. Download some Smalltalk implementation and try it out - plenty of free ones about. Download Ruby and Python while you're at it. I'm assuming you already have Java? --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
