> Yes, I was refering to CFC method vs. a UDF and custom tag. > CFCs have limitations for complex inheritance hierarchies (performances, > lack of super()). > But anyway, if you require a very complex object model with complex > inheritance hierarchies, you should not go for CFCs but directly for Java > (with some CFCs wrapper/facade if required). > Suggesting that Java should be used instead of CFCs just proves that certain use cases for CFCs have problems.
> As for the overhead associated with stateful CFCs, I am not aware of that > (and it seems that Sean Corfield is not either). > Sean should certainly be aware of the issues as he was involved in the threads that discussed it. > I am on CF-Talk (probably one of the most active technical CF list) and I > don't think I've ever seen this problem mentioned. > I just made a search on "stateful CFC" and "persisted CFC" and it gave no > results. > These issues were discussed on this list and CFGURU. > They might have some overhead as you said. > But I'm not sure it will prevent you to build scalable sites. > Because the overhead is too high. What I think is interesting is that people keep assuming that certain use cases with CFC will be fine. Don't assume; test! I have tested most of the CFC use cases and am aware of what works and doesn't. Again, I state that complex inheritance hierarchies and persisted models for use in MVC result in scalability problems with CFCs. -Matt ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com).
