Correction. CFC Dev list. not cftalk, but same theory applies. sim
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 15:58:50 -0700, Simeon Bateman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My vote is for the Design Patterns book. > > I want to chime in on the "Examples" part of this thread. The fact > that this has started on the cftalk list means that beginners and > experts alike are reading about "Design Patterns". For beginners they > are going to go out and try to suck up any info they can about these > so called "Design Patterns" because thats what they folks who answer > thier questions think are important. I dont have enough experience > with the subject to say wether mixed patterns or simple single > patterns are the way to go. But what I do know is that until people > need them, or see the reason for having them, they wont really have a > basis for understanding them. So from my experience it is important > to show the possible before and after of an example. I am currently > working on several apps that have several versions. They start as a > fb3 app, then as a fb4 app. the an fb4 app with a cfc model. then a > "properly" implemented OO model. Because of the number of questions i > get from friends about such things I found it was the best way to help > them learn. Showing poeple the final stage without showing them what > it is we are overcoming will very likely lead to improper > implementation by beginners who think "this is what I must do". > > Of course my thoughts on this are because of the people who ask me > questions, but I figure they are a target for this book so thier needs > may need to be taken into account. > > My 2 cents. > sim > > > > On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 18:49:12 -0400, Bryan F. Hogan > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sean is right. I agree with showing examples of what pattern is better > > suited to an application. I don't agree the performance. If one was > > going to implement an enterprise application they are more concerned > > about maintainability as Sean notes than they are that a page loads in x > > mill. > > > > > > > > Sean Corfield wrote: > > > > > Please tell me you're joking? > > > > > > People use patterns to improve maintainability, not to improve > > > performance (with one or two notable exceptions, of course). > > > > > > What is this obsession with "millisecond" level performance? (Which > > > has nothing to do with real world performance under load) > > > > > > On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 23:39:08 +0200 (CEST), Stijn Dreezen > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>At least pay some attention to performance (which pattern is better suited > > >>for which kind of application, how much milliseconds the pattern framework > > >>would consume on average systems, ...). One Spectra 1.5 has already been > > >>enough ;) > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > 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]
