Taco, I guess nobody replied to your original post, I know I didn't and I posted a response to you on this one and you ignored me so what is your point?
I still can't see why you are tying to do what you are doing, and maybe neither can a lot of other developers either. What is the idea of passing arguments to the super.init anyway? Regards Andrew Scott Technical Consultant NuSphere Pty Ltd Level 2/33 Bank Street South Melbourne, Victoria, 3205 Phone: 03 9686 0485 - Fax: 03 9699 7976 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Taco Fleur Sent: Wednesday, 6 October 2004 2:21 PM To: CFAussie Mailing List Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Super( arguments collection ) > I'll be blunt, Well if we are going to be blunt.. > You need to chill out more. I don't think you can meet anyone that chills out more than I do.. But you can't see that in an email ;-)) > The problem with this whole topic has been, you didn't get an > immediate answer from a problem that you liked, not only that the > proposed method of attack you have outlined in many ways just doesn't > hold water, in that its not a typical every day solution that you > would face in OOP (before you start counter-arguments on CFMX and OOP > read on). See, making assumptions and doing the twisting again, where exactly did I say I was worried about not getting an answer? What I was worried about was you fooling around.. Tell me exactly which part of my method of attack does not hold water? I found a solution to super.init( argumentsCollection = arguments ) a solution that no one since the last time I started this thread has been able to solve. Yeah, uh, well I do believe this is what the whole thread has been about (I should now because I started it), but that went right by you huh Scott? You didn't get it huh? > Then after all this, you decide to then go an make a smart ass comment > about not only myself and others who are on this list that "ramble on > about OO" and yet don't understand it. You gotta learn to pick your > battles and when to walk away, as you come off too aggressive and > looking like an idiot. Well the word everyone was actually YOU, but I didn't want to make you feel to bad.. And nobody else took offense by it, so.. Now who's the [profane word] [profane word] and [profane word].. > At anyrate, dislike me or not, really doesn't make a difference to me, > but don't assume to understand my skills or skillset just because i > found your personal dilemma frustrating. The reason i found it > frustrating as it goes against everything I have *actually* learned > about OOP. I don't pretend to assume that i'm the god of OOP, hell i'm > still learning and unlike you, i'm open to new concepts put forth. > I've not had the X number of years of OOP background as some people on > this list (ie Sean, Gary etc). It's a problem, in real life you are actually not hat bad, when you don't talk. Assuming, twisting and pulling other people in who I did not even mention, yeah go on.. You touched my skillset before I touched yours.. > I like the word Monkey, because its a funny term (whether you or > others agree is another topic) and its a term commonly used when i was > at TQ, and habits die hard. When I call someone a Code Monkey it > means, you aren't a moron, quite the opposite your at a level of > "coding" > respect. If i call > you a newbie, then you can take issue with it...thats the whole > "Monkey" > definition/glossary of terms. I like how you like the word monkey, because you are a monkey.. Where did the CodeMonkey come into this conversation, creating some composition are we, or inheritance Scott "is a"? > While CFMX is a totally different discipline and maybe thats the > biggest struggle most of us face, in that making CFMX into an OOP > ruleset when in fact it doesn't have to be, yet we can't quite seem to > let that go... its only taken me the last couple of months, to realise > that making CFMX into this Strict Coding Language is a waste of time, > as it breaks a lot of rules and doesn't adhere to ones i like. I'm > still learning JAVA & C#, so in many ways I'm still a newbie to OOP > and i'll happilly admit that. I never slag CFMX of never, so where did that come from? I'm a newbie to OO too, although I understood many of the concepts before I could give it the fancy name Inheritance, encapsulation, or polymorphism - you don't need to know all those words to know OO.. So what? I hate it when people are on the list throwing all these fancy words that they know most of the people don't understand anyway, makes 'm look cool, and we are to help are we? > At anyrate, point is you come off too aggressive and depsite the list > being a supposed "help for the CFMXer downunder" its not here waiting > for "Taco's problem of the day", we all have jobs/priorities of our > own, and those of us who do post on here to *try* and help others, > whether we are right/wrong we still donate our time and energy in > helping..aswell as prooving to ourselves concepts we have floating > around in our noggins is infact right. Its good to problem solve, but > its only as good as the person who has the problem, in that if you > start counter-acting peoples intentions with a negative attitude, your > gonna find yourself caught in a thread like this one. Yes, so what, I don't see what it has got to do with anything, is this from another post again or something? The only person I counteract is you, I have to otherwise my problem would turn into a giant disaster, ooh sjeesh it just did (guess I did not counteract you to good, wait it's ignoring that I should do when it comes to you, forgot).. I don't expect anyone to answer, and I don't get upset if no one answers, I might throw the question in the list again, or reformat the question and throw it in again, or even months later throw it in again, but I don't get pissed off, I don't understand where all this is coming from? Yeah you piss me off, but that's about it. > Nothing personal, but in future, i'll just butt out of your threads, > as its quite clear we both don't get along CFMX wise. Scott, that's is the most sensible thing you ever said, to be honest, I am not going to miss you one bit, I never found any help in your posts anyway, same thing when you talk (I'm not the only one who thinks that either ;-).. > Scott Out. > > P,S > Everytime you post a negative flamewar on a list, Taco Kills a monkey. > Think on that. > > P.S.S > Everytime I post on here, thats less $$ in my pocket (even now, this > email cost me $0.15), I'm saying people owe me for it, I'm saying be > mindful in contract roles, time is money and if I or others take time > to help others via this list, be aware they are basically paying for > the right to help you/others. > just doing what scott is good at ;-)) And you still spend 15 minutes on writing this post?? I'm glad you wanted to continue this flamewar, at least now I was able to say what I wanted to say. Well I have said all I could say, if you want to take this any further, why not do it privately? --- 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/
