I think that in most cases, accessing the form vars in a component ruins the
separation of business and display logic . . . which may be OK depending on
how much of a purist you are.
I agree. It's a trade off: if the CFC is specifically designed to process a form, you can argument that accessing form scope directly is OK, but it's not something I'd do.
I think the better solution is to name all of the CFARGUMENTs the same as
your form inputs, then use the ARGUMENTCOLLECTION attribute of CFINVOKE to
pass in the variables.
Yes, that would work nicely.
Note that if you use Mach II, this machinery is handled for you: all the form scope variables are put into an Event object by the framework and that is passed to your CFCs. The framework also provides built-in machinery for grouping fields on a form into more manageable "bean" CFCs.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood
----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email.
CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com).
An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
