there is already the capability to to that sort of thing usinf CFFUNCTION
create your own library if you need to.
<cffunction name="dump">
<cfdump var="#Arguments[1]#">
</cffunction>
<cffunction name="abort">
<cfabort>
</cffunction>
but then again, your making a very easy language difficult again. The
advantage of CFML is that it IS tag based and IS easy to write and read. If
you start going towards a script based language, then you start to loose the
really cool stuff like cfoutput, cfquery and so on.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Adam
Cameron
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 1:12 PM
To: CFAussie Mailing List
Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Using IIF
> I'm wishing the same thing, as well as a whole swag of over operators,
> making CFSCRIPT more ecmascript compliant. I wish they had focused some of
> their attention that way...
I raised this a while back: didn't get much comment one way or the other.
I reckon the only place I want to see a <cf> is like this:
<?cf
query(name="q", datasource=application.dsn, sql="select * from table
where
col1 = #queryparam(value="adam", type="varchar", length=4)# order by
col1");
dump(q);
abort();
// etc
/>
IE: like ASP, PHP, JSP: have a marker that delimits where the code starts
and stops, and everything outwith that is HTML. I just cannot fathom this
whole <cfthis>, <cfthat>, <cfeverybliminthing>
Without the tag nonsense, they could get rid of the excrutiatingly awful
operators LT, GT etc.
I wish they'd just deprecate CFML completely and just move everything over
into cfscript.
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/
