On the contrary, I think this is exactly on-topic (and I've adjusted the subject to something more appropriate). The advent of CFCs introduced OO concepts into CFML for the first time -- and many CFers are now trying to learn what the implications are. Mach II is one of the attempts to take advantage of the CFC capabilities and go further by providing a "framework" (and no, let's not get into the framework vs. architecture vs. method vs. etc. discussion) for people to write applications.
I second Barney's thanks to Sean for expounding on the subject to give some background to the discussion of different approaches to structuring our applications -- which is, in many ways, what CFCs are all about. I am curious -- are you endorsing Mach II Sean? At first glance (and admittedly with little time spent digging into it) it seems the primary benefit here is to provide structure for folks who otherwise might not have it. True? Or, am I missing the boat here? > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Barney Boisvert > Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 10:15 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [CFCDev] Extra white space > > > Now that this is totally off topic, I wanted to say thanks for the long > description. I don't have the formal experience with language design that > you do (which I should before arguing about it ;)). The > distinction between > declarative and procedural is of particular interest, and one which had > never been made clear to me before. I didn't read the entire > email yet, but > I will, and probably come back with some questions. > > cheers, > barneyb > ---------------------------------------------------------- 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).
