Taco Fleur wrote:
You know what worries me the most, everyone has been rambling and raving on about OO, but it appears the basic principles of OO are not known to many of you who are rambling, especially you Scott (not including you Adam and and and ;-\)
A) I don't ramble, i "crap-on" and appearances are deceiving, much like your CF SKILLS ;)
B) OO is more like DO in that OO is a strech of CFMX capabilities, it'd class it more as "nice data objects" and leave it at that...CFMX 7.1 review pending of course.
C) Well, your communication needs work, it was only until after the others finished it up that i finally put the pieces of what you intended to do - thus you spent the last 48 hours typing a diary - hour by hour- entry for us all to enjoy. Even now as I type this, I've still got a big ? over my head as to what the hell you are doing and why.
D) The fact you wanting a language to do a quasi over-loading method type concept - that is, you are passing in datasource arguments into an object, which will then define its databrokers needs from there on out - or once again, did you loose me again - communication tells me that you still haven't figured out the concepts of "has a" and "is a" a bit more... That or the singleton pattern may help you in this case..who knows what the hell you are doing.
Regards Scott Barnes
--- 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/
