Well... I value your input... but as I said, it is more of a religious belief than a defined belief. We live in a culture where even the question of marriage definitions are standing in question. Yet, you dogmatically define this as an absolute. Heh... I will continue to glean from your writings, you have much to offer and in areas you definitely know more than me. Yet, I am not much of a respecter of persons... so "I disagree" is merely a statement... give me some facts.
Today is a history day with X-Prize possibly being in the reach of the first winner! Conventional thinking and following rigid standards weren't thrown to the wind by this crew. They were also not "stuck to the patterns of the past". What they did was "evaluated" when and where to apply the patterns. That is what I am talking about, and it is a bit self ingratiating to just say I disagree. How about some dialog or references to the issue of frameworks... rather than strict adherence to truths in external realms. >It's why the Mach II team are looking very closely at the (mistaken) choice to use request scope as a data bus. It was a bad decision and it can lead to poorly encapsulated code. Hey... a poor implementation doesn't prove the concept to be bad! And if this was such a bad idea, why didn't you blow the horn sooner? Aren't you one of the main supporters of Mach II? Glad to hear that you are changing things where there are issues. Yet, if there aren't errors... what is the actual issue. NOTE: I would also agree with you that using a request based "data bus" ... like that term, very good declaration of the issue... could be an issue. My bigger question... is there a variable coding guideline in Mach II, good and bad variable usage principles. Does Mach II have a Framework that covers API rules from coding methodology to presentation layer variable rules and techniques? That is how I term Framework... it helps for us to define our terms... if there is a better term for that, I don't know what it is. That is what I refer to by the term. Linux and Windows are two examples of very rich frameworks. John Farrar -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sean Corfield Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 7:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [CFCDev] Function Libraries On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 18:28:15 -0400, John D Farrar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I disagree. ---------------------------------------------------------- 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]
