I read these posts all the time...and quite frankly, they are usually over my head. This thread has been different. Not only do I understand it, but it has been very entertaining!
Adam, why are you so bitter? Did you work for Allair? Did MM fire you? Don't you have anything better to do with your time than argue over aspects of a product you clearly do not like? One more question, I just want to know, since you quite obviously think it sucks, why are you still using ColdFusion? In closing, Adam, I have found that Welbutrin has really improved my ability to respond to irritation in a rational and reasonable manner. No sarcasm intended at all, I would recommend you give it a try (it takes several weeks to work and you will not even notice it has had an effect, until you stop taking it and realize you are again yelling and screaming with little provocation). Sean, with MM, machii, blog, java, c++, fusebox 4.01, family, cats...so many ways to spend your time constructively. You should stop responding to Adam. He clearly is interested in debate for debates sake. If you get the upper hand, he will likely change the debate and attempt to prove that winning the debate testifies to your debate skills not your coding skills. Sincerely, Mark Fuqua moxt -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sean Corfield Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 4:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [CFCDev] Calling CFC method as URL always returns WDDX? On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 09:30:36 +1300, Adam Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Which was entirely how this *sidebar* arose in the first place. The > mere fact that MM document erroneous behaviour doesn't mitigate the fact > the behaviour is wrong in the first place. No, the behavior is not erroneous - you just have the wrong expectation about the function. Others posting here seemed pretty clear on the distinction, including the fact that your assertion that int() behaved like round() was incorrect. The documentation of those four math functions is very clear about their respective behaviors. Could the function be better named? If it were called floor() instead of int(), would that have changed your expectation? > I agree that the behaviour we were actually discussing - the WDDX thing > - *isn't* "erroneous", just "unexpected" by me Well, this is another place where the documentation is pretty clear about the intended behavior - which is why I initially replied with "RTFM :)" If the actual behavior is clearly at odds with the documented behavior, then it's a bug - either in the product or the docs. If you simply don't like the (documented) behavior, that's another matter entirely... but it ain't a bug! > 1) I concede it's just not necessary. The current behaviour is fine; Good. -- Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/ Team Fusebox -- http://www.fusebox.org/ Got Gmail? -- I have 1 invite "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ---------------------------------------------------------- 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]
