Passing null to java is a completely different issue, really. Would be nice, since a lot of Java stuff depends on passing null around (for reasons outlined previously), but a CF null would be more beneficial the the ability to pass it to Java.
cheers, barneyb On 5/12/05, Ben Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Of course, we won't really know until Macromedia implements both and tells > us which was more difficult. :) It's possible they could implement support > for this feature in a very shallow way by simply allowing a function with > returntype="ComponentName" to return nothing or an empty string. However, > that wouldn't solve the problem for all those folks who want to be able to > pass null values to java objects. > > Ben Rogers > http://www.c4.net > v.508.240.0051 > f.508.240.0057 -- Barney Boisvert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 360.319.6145 http://www.barneyb.com/ Got Gmail? I have 50 invites. ---------------------------------------------------------- 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). CFCDev is supported by New Atlanta, makers of BlueDragon http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/index.cfm An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
