Yes, that's precisely what I'm doing and I do try to var everything.
Typically within functions I'll declare a <cfset var local = structnew()>
and try to work within IT for most of the vars, as appopriate, so I have an
easy envelope for things like loopcounters, e.g. local.i and so on. I also
declare a <cfset var q = structnew()> and use that exclusively for cfquery
and cfstoredproc resultset names.
Anyway, my real question though was regarding how I showed I was utilizing
the transferBean. It is declared in the constructor of the CFC ('once') and
is used to move data back and forth between components; in the functions I
do <cfset var transfer = variables.transferBean> in order to get a local
scoped copy, leaving the constructor copy intact, waiting for more requests
to copy to a functions local scope. Is this sound? I think it is, but I'm
not sure what the ramifications of passing by reference are in regards to
thread safety. This particular bean cfc is just an object where I store
result data and errors when making calls from one cfc to the other, so its
used A LOT. I use a similar approach with session userBeans. Does this
sound ok?
Just to restate in code:
<cfcomponent>
<cfset transferBean = createobject("component","transferBean")>
<cffunction name="someProcess" returntype="transferBean">
<cfset var transfer = transferBean>
<cfset transfer.setValue(result from something)>
<cfreturn transfer>
</cffunction>
</cfcomponent>
Thanks,
Kevin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barry L Beattie
> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 7:39 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [CFCDev] Testing Thread Safety
>
>
>
> hang on, aren't you decorating your object with functionality
> from common, error, transferBean?
>
> <cfcomponent>
>
> <!--- include a copy of the common cfc functions here --->
> <cfset common = createobject("component","common")>
> <cfset error = createobject("component","error")>
> <cfset transferBean =
> createobject("component","transferBean")><!---
> this is a cfc used for moving return values between cfc's --->
>
> so if this component was in application scope, the others
> would be part of the same memory space? and if you var'd
> everything (like people are suggesting - even to the point of
> <cfset var qry = queryNew("") />...) and checked for race
> conditions when working with instance data within the CFC...
>
> ...what else could go wrong?
>
> I ask because I do this all the time and I'd welcome being
> corrected if I've FooBar'd anything...
>
> thanx
> barry.b
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ___________________________________________________________
> Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
