init seems to be a special case, for the most part, I would prefer to see Super.DoXYZtoABC(someXYZ, someABC);
rather than Super.anonymousMethod(someStructureofVariables); Self-documenting code is my preference. The method should to some degree state what it is doing, providing clues to the arguments. If there are optional arguments, I'd be thinking a separate method/function would be preferable, but there's no context / example code so I cant be sure what is being done in that instance. Aaron ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barry Beattie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CFAussie Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 12:35 PM Subject: [cfaussie] Re: super.method() >> The ONLY way to do it is ordered values: >> super.foo(arg1, arg2, arg3) you mean if you're using optional arguments and doing this super.foo(arg1, , arg3, , , arg6) or similar? yeah damn stupid. happens in VB and VBS all the time - using the , as placeholders. HOWEVER (to play devils advocate here) you just have to be careful that the passed in struct super.init(argumentCollection = arguments ) matches the expected API - in both values AND names.... just 2c barry.b -----Original Message----- From: Adam Cameron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 15 July 2004 11:53 AM To: CFAussie Mailing List Subject: [cfaussie] Re: super.method() > I've never had an issue with it because I have never run into the bug myself :) Which is fair enough. > I'm not getting dragged into an argument about whether super.init( > argumentCollection = arguments ) is better than super.init( name = > value, name = value, name = value ), But that's the point... well it's *not* the point in this case. NEITHER of those two syntaxes work. Youca nnot name any arguments that you pass into a parent class' method, if using the super keyword. The ONLY way to do it is ordered values: super.foo(arg1, arg2, arg3) This works well in situations where all the arguments are known ahead of time, and are passed in in a prescribed order. We've a number of situations where this is absolutely not possible, which means that CF's weird implementation of CFC inheritance is useless to us. And accordingly... needs to be fixed. Adam --- 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/ --- 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/ --- 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/
