Re: [CFCDev] Beans: Explicit vs Implicit arguments?

Peter J. Farrell Thu, 15 Jul 2004 11:05:10 -0700

As would I....thanks in advance.
.peter

David Murphy wrote:

I would love a copy.

Thanks,

David

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:08:35 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

one link to bind them...
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/

Doug

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Cave, Phillip (Contractor)
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 3:07 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] Beans: Explicit vs Implicit arguments?
Thanks dude... Here we go again. 1000+ messages on the why and
why nots of getters and setters ;)
Phillip
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 3:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [CFCDev] Beans: Explicit vs Implicit arguments?
If the getters and setters are so easy to script up then they
shouldn't be
there in the first place. Using getters and setters is a
debatable practice
to being with, but when you throw code generation into the mix
the practice
is surely bad; some would even say the practice is evil.
-Matt
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Ken Dunnington
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 2:47 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [CFCDev] Beans: Explicit vs Implicit arguments?
Thanks, Barney, that was such a great idea I went ahead and
whipped up
a script to do just that! It lets you choose the database and table,
and then lets you decide what data types to use, set required and
default attributes (as well as name) and then spits out a ready made
CFC bean! You just saved me countless hours of typing. :) If anybody
would like a copy of this script, let me know and I'd be happy to
share.
- Ken
On Jul 12, 2004, at 3:40 PM, Barney Boisvert wrote:
I started down the same route, and it works pretty well.
I opted to
throw
exceptions if you get or set an invalid property, but it generally
works
quite well.
However, once I built a tool that will auto-generate my CFCs for me based on a schema (currently read from the DB, though it could come from anywhere), building all those getters and setters was irrelevant,
because I just
let CF
do it for me.
If mindless repetition of code is the stumbling block for actually using beans, that's something that can definitely be beaten by
the computer.

Sure, it requires a little development that appears

"non-productive",
but it
really is worth it.
Cheers,
barneyb
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Dunnington
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 11:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [CFCDev] Beans: Explicit vs Implicit arguments?
I am trying to get into Mach-ii and just read Ben Edwards' article about using Beans. I have been using for some time a
method of data

encapsulation that relies on implicit arguments. In my CFC I declare an instance struct within the variables scope - nothing new there. Then I have two functions, get(string varName) and set(string varName, string varValue) which search the instance scope for the

variable requested.

If it does not exist, get returns an empty string, while

set creates

the variable and assigns it the given value. This has

worked well for

rapid application development (I am the only CF/database

developer at

my company, so I develop application code alongside developing database schemas.) but I know it's not really a best practice. My

question is,

what is the general consensus concerning the use of

beans, with their
strict rules of getters and setters, and what are people's
thoughts on
my method? It has definitely saved me time, with only a few small
caveats (dealing with undefined numeric values, for example.)
----------------------------------------------------------
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]
----------------------------------------------------------
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]
******************************************************************************************
The information contained in this message, including attachments, may contain
privileged or confidential information that is intended to be delivered only to the
person identified above. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person
responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, ALLTEL requests
that you immediately notify the sender and asks that you do not read the message or its
attachments, and that you delete them without copying or sending them to anyone else.

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

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]

Re: [CFCDev] Beans: Explicit vs Implicit arguments?

Reply via email to