On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 22:21:20 +1300, Adam Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Let me get you straight on this, Sean. You are saying that not being able > to pass arg/value pairs to a method in the extended component is actually > not a problem?
I agree it's a bug that should be fixed but my position is that it's much more of an edge case than some people seem to think. As Scott says "Not knowing what arguments will come in/out of an objects inherited method to me sounds like a recipe for pain" - I agree. Explicitly managing the argument passing is, in my opinion, better practice and I tend to also agree with Scott's assessment that "It Sounds like a lazy way out even for Coldfusion's standards". I concede that it would definitely be convenient if this worked but that convenience makes me uneasy - it's the double-edged sword that underlies so much of ColdFusion: it's very easy to write programs... but it's very easy to write bad programs. Some people think CF shouldn't allow certain bad practices and whilst I have plenty of sympathy for that view, deep down I would rather see CF behave consistently, without bugs, than "litigate" what developers can and can't write... -- Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/ Team Fusebox -- http://www.fusebox.org/ Got Gmail? -- I have 2 invites "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood --- 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/
