Joe Rinehart wrote:
Concerning efficiency, I think any code released to the outside world
as a development tool should employ the most efficient methods known
to the developer writing them. If it's an internal one-off project, I
can understand letting some stuff go, but to release something that's
a fundamental type like an iterator without having it work as
efficiently as possible probably isn't ideal, regardless of the market
(SOHO, internal, public release).
Efficiency has merits... but sufficient performance is the question I
meant to raise. If this doesn't scale to an app that runs on superbowl
night... don't use it for that app. It does scale to use on most
solutions though... and I would hate to hire a programmer that spent my
development dollars on testing and focusing on getting clock cycles out
of the code rather than getting function to the web site. Development
speed and lifecycle code management at a developers ability level is
always an issue. (To him that understandeth everything is simple.) ...
with that said, yes we can do things a little faster and a little this
and that. In the end we get job security not because we don't think our
methods are simple... but because just like it took us time to come to
our methods... it takes others time also. That is the SOHO focus I
refered to. SOHO companies usually don't hire people like you and me on
staff do they? They don't want to pay what we can get elsewhere.
Therefore... simplification of tools is a great thing! Joe... bet you
don't work for a small company. Or better yet... bet if you ran a glass
repair and window shop for example... you wouldn't see efficiency on the
same plane as you do now. You would just want it to run consistantly.
You can log pages that are running slow and tweek them rather than
making every line of code streamlined. That is something us gurus
forget. Programming is about more than programming. Ideals aren't always
needed to the level we push them. That is why big industry creates
"specs" for projects... and they don't get the "best" of everything. I
agree it would be great if we could do the "most efficient" thing
always... but the question is if the CFC's, TAGs and such are performing
to "SPEC". This is resolved by checking page execution time. Then
evaluating the bottlenecks. (In a SOHO approach that is.)
Thanks for listen to my SOHO speach... heh!
John Farrar
----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to
[email protected] 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/[email protected]
