What's great about CFCs is that people can approach CF using OO concepts.... Which is very cool
But CF is not (and my understanding, was never meant to be) a *Pure* OO language. So applying OO methods can be good, but not compulsory David -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Cameron Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 11:13 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [CFCDev] Serialization of CFCs >> The bottom line is basically, don't use cfinclude within CFCs. >It would be bad OO practice anyway. And if CF was an OO language, that would be relevant. CF's *not* an OO language, and when working within its limitations, sometimes it's preferable to share some code across CFCs. I can't understand how people get some dogmatic about going all OO about CF just because it's got CFCs now. Adam ---------------------------------------------------------- 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]
