OK, now that RedSky is in the public we can talk about some of the
implications of the changes.
I had assumed that once RedSky came out I would abandon using my virtual
"private" scope I always call "instance" and start using "variables". But,
now I'm not so sure.
Why?
For one, the variables scope in a CFC contains a key called "THIS" -- which
still just feels very wrong to me.
Also, the variables scope contains keys for every method in a component,
public and private.
I find it attractive to think that the "instance" struct contains only
instance data and nothing else. I've used it in many places to do things
like persistence of a component instance (basically, by returning and
serializing "instance") and for things like cloning/mirroring of component
instances.
Those may seem like esoteric cases, but they may be reason enough for me to
stick with "instance" (especially since they indicate to me there may be
future reasons I can't yet imagine to want all my instance data in a single,
unsullied, struct ("scope", if you will).
But, I'm not sure -- and thus the purpose of this thread.
Am I crazy to stick with "instance" over moving to "variables"?
- Nathan
----------------------------
Nathan Dintenfass
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nathan.dintenfass.com
Now bloggin' at: http://www.changemedia.org
----------------------------------------------------------
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).
