On 10/26/05, John Ottenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I guess my question would be what advantage do you see that providing? > > Personal preference mainly. I find it easier to read (and type) cfscript > code vs tagged code.
Unless there's some technical advantage this could provide for future functionality I doubt it'll happen. I've heard various folks from MM asked the question "why isn't XXX available in cfscript?" and the answer that's usually given is cost/benefit from the standpoint of the development of the next version of CF. If there's a way to get it done using tags then doing a bunch of work to make the same thing happen with script would be extremely low on the list of priorities, and personally I'd rather see them spend their time on new features instead of just making old ones available via script. Also when you think about all the attributes you can add to the tags for self-documenting, you'd actually lose quite a bit by going with script, or they'd have to come up with a way of having this same thing happen in script (javadoc-style or something along those lines). -- Matt Woodward [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mattwoodward.com ---------------------------------------------------------- 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]
