I like to think of CFCs as Abstract Data Types ( which is the procedural programming parallel to an object). Basically, they are just a way to encapsulate data and functionality together. OO design and procedural design are two very different approaches to development.
However, CFCs do have some elements of OO to them. I just don't use them in my development.
I did come across an area where I have two CFCs using almost identical code, both operating on an array of (the same) objects. Although right now I have two copies of the code, I believe that an include of those two functions may be conducive to future maintenance.
For those really interested, I could go into more details.
At 07:13 PM 7/6/2004, you wrote:
>> 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
--
Jeffry Houser, Web Developer, Writer, Songwriter, Recording Engineer
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
AIM: Reboog711 | Phone: 1-203-379-0773
--
My Books: <http://www.instantcoldfusion.com>
Recording Music: <http://www.fcfstudios.com>
Original Energetic Acoustic Rock: <http://www.farcryfly.com>
----------------------------------------------------------
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]
