Mark, I've read your blog article, several times ... been feeling the pain of it silently for awhile now. I'm currently just experimenting and rolling ideas around in my mind.
For me, the operative concept on the issue of typing is becoming "trade-off". What's better? That the application sits here largely unused on my dev machine with mappings and typed arguments and packages and we just sell projects to high-end clients that want customized versions of the app? Or i make whatever compromises are necessary and adopt a "mappingless" approach, and free things up a little so i can host many instances of this thing on a dedicated server(s) and expand our business? So what are the possible compromises? Use slashes instead of dots and stay with one OS? Put all the components in a single directory? Don't use typing? I'm leaning toward putting all components in a single directory. Ok, it's a little painful not to have it organized, but my mind has to deal with lots more difficult things - i'll manage! Why is "leaving CFC code at application root level the least cumbersome of the options"? Why not in a single directory under the root? Or above the root if you don't want your CFC's within your web directory structure? thanks for your input! Nando > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Mark Mandel > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 2:23 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [CFCDev] Factories and mappings > > > Nando - > > You using relative pathing ("/") in your types etc when doing this, or > you simply avoiding typing arguments etc? (either any or > web-inf.cftags.component) > > This is something I've been beating my head against for ages now - > glad to see someone else is feeling my pain. > > Currently I have my top level Factory using the ServiceFactory to > manage if there is a given mapping to the code I'm using, and create > one if there isn't (usually setting up a namespace like > com.mywebsite.iwrotethis here). This works very well for personal > code, but if you have something you want to distribute, either as a > product, or as open source, it's just not going to work. > > I'm starting to think that leaving CFC code at application root level > is the least cumbersome of the options. > > I was running with using the relative mapping approach, but the fact > you had to have \ for Windows, and / for Mac/Unix really threw me off > the idea. > > Mark > > On 9/13/05, Nando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks for the support Kerry. I'm going for the "every instance is an > > island" approach. > > > -- > E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > W: www.compoundtheory.com > ICQ: 3094740 > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > 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] > > ---------------------------------------------------------- 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]
