the "hidden" features are actually java? so it doesnt matter if CF changes, only if the java implementation changes? raising the possibility that the undocumented features could be more stable than the documented ones? :)
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Raymond Camden Sent: 23 February 2005 15:09 To: CFCDev@cfczone.org Subject: Re: [CFCDev] Using application.cfc to modify the request stream On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:50:38 -0000, Adam Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Pity MM are so adamant that we shouldn't use the methods of the "internal" > CF classes. There is a reason for that though. Every feature that is "official" goes through heavy QA and testing. If MACR hasn't "outed" a hidden feature it may be that it will be removed later on. This is the same warning we always hear about hidden stuff, but it still applies. You use these features at your own risk. -Ray ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to cfcdev@cfczone.org with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to cfcdev@cfczone.org with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
