Re: [CFCDev] BD vs. CFMX, WAS: OUTPUT="false", WAS: RFC, CFC Best Practices

[Matt Liotta]

It could also be said that CFMX is used by a fraction of CFML 
developers. That is of course changing as time goes on. The same goes 
for BD. I can only imagine what the situation will be with BD.NET. I am 
certainly seeing enough demand for .NET that I am staying up to speed 
with BD.

-Matt

On Mar 16, 2004, at 5:27 PM, Nathan Dintenfass wrote:

Since you asked, IMHO all discussion of BlueDragon syntax really 
belongs on
a Blue Dragon list.  I'm obviously biased since I'm not a Blue Dragon 
user,
but it's hard to deny that MACR's implementation of CFML is still
"authoritative" (which is not to say I don't agree a standard would be
nice -- but it ain't there now), and BD is the anomaly used by a tiny
fraction of CFML developers.




-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Barney Boisvert
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 12:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] OUTPUT="false", WAS: RFC, CFC Best Practices
Speaking of BD, how does it handle the CFPROCESSINGDIRECTIVE issue?

My opinion is that the "proper" handling would be that CFFUNCTION
OUTPUT="TRUE" is treated exactly the same as CFOUTPUT, and therefore 
would
be outputted even inside CFPROCESSINGDIRECTIVE, rather than CF's
behaviour.

Along these lines, anyone have a clever idea to differentiate the CFMX
language from it's different implementations (MM's ColdFusion MX, NA's
BlueDragon, perhaps others)?  So when making statements like
these it can be
clear whether it's a language features/bug or a implementation
feature/bug.
Not that there is a formal language spec, though that would be nice.


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sean A Corfield
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 12:30 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [CFCDev] OUTPUT="false", WAS: RFC, CFC Best Practices
On Mar 16, 2004, at 10:35 AM, Barney Boisvert wrote:
To add the to OUTPUT dilemma, keep in mind that it's a three-way
attribute, not a boolean, and has some other werid quirks:
 
 - if missing, the function body will be output (according to the
rules of your application) with no modifications.
 - if TRUE, the function body will be output (according to
the rules
of your application with hashes rendered as if inside a
CFOUTPUT tag.
 - if FALSE, the function body will emit no content
This is true in CFMX but not in BlueDragon - BD treats the "missing"
case just like the "false" case (which I actually think makes more
sense). Therefore it is important to be explicit and always specify
output= (and usually specify output="false" unless you have a method
that is a display method which would need output="true").
Regards,
Sean
----------------------------------------------------------
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]
----------------------------------------------------------
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]

----------------------------------------------------------
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]

----------------------------------------------------------
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]