(Sorry for the confused response chain - it's pretty hard to respond to HTML email like this.)
>> However, seriously, the code you posted isn't difficult to work through but >> actually does require quite a bit of sophistication to do. >Not to be a pain, but I googled asp send mail and had 3 hits in the top 5 showing how to use CDONTS to send mail in ASP. That doesn't really >demonstrate a lot of sophistication, at least IMHO. We're talking about degree here, not kind. How many questions that could be answered by a Google search are asked on any technical board every day? However the simple fact that the mail object is not called "mail" IS confusing - it forces people to remember a disassociated fact. Now it's not TOO confusing. But when faced with learning something new every little bit helps. > Having to know both that an object is needed AND which object is needed > (especially with such a completely appropriate name!) shows a rather > advanced level of understanding. > > > Mail.To="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > Mail.From="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > Mail.Subject="Test Subject" > > Mail.Body="Test Body" > > Setting properties (and knowing how and what properties can be set) is > another "new" concept for HTML users. It's not that it's hard, of course, > just (at least initially) confusing. >So you're arguing that setting properties is "advanced" and therefore CF is better? I pity the developer who inherits > the code that's going to be >written in CF by this person who can't figure out how to set properties. As an aside, a > suprising number of "normal" office workers, like >secretaries, admin assistants, and biz analysts know how to set > > properties on MS objects since many build macros to handle common MS Office tasks. No - don't put words in my mouth. It's not "advanced" - but it IS a programming concept. Simple as that. It's a programming concept that's not needed to do the same task in CF. This doesn't make things "better" or "worse", but it's a simple fact that you have to "know more" to do it in ASP. > And of course any web *designer* knows a smidgen of CSS, which is all about properties. Not in this sense, not simply. You don't get into dot-notation with CSS until you actually start programming CSS. The ability to equate CSS declarations with settable properties is actually a rather bold sophistication in and of itself. >> You really can get quite a bit of useful work out of CF without requiring >> any programming knowledge or concepts. (How well that trend continues into >> more advanced constructs is debatable of course.) >Assuming you need simple one-offs (send this email) -- anything of any complexity requires setting up datasources, >writing SQL, etc. Of course. I'd never challenge that. Of course CF makes those tasks much simpler as well. However it should be clear that the learning curve is reduced drastically because of this. I can do easy things easily (or, to be fair, "more easily") which makes learning more advanced things easier. I'm faced with less frustration from the start. >> I feel strongly that those concepts are useful and well worth knowing, but >> many people just don't need them to get the job done with CF. >That holds true for the simplest possible tasks. And $1200 (CF license) to send an ocassional email seems like a lot >compared to googling "asp send email", cut/pasting the tutorial, and moving on with the work. For purposes of my point price and platform aren't relevant. I'm only discussing the paradigms, not the reality. In reality there are dozens of variables which determine which application server can be used, should be used, will be used. None of that affects the conceptual model however. Again, I'm not claiming an enormous difference here. This is a matter of (subtle) degree and may not be linear. It can be easily argued, for example, that while ASP requires up-front knowledge that knowledge is both more easily transferred to other disciplines (the macros and office work you mention for example) and better prepares the user for more advanced tasks. You can say (flippantly, but with some truth) that there are more "bad" CF programmers than "bad" ASP programmers simply because ASP demands a little more from its users. That which does not kill us makes us stronger after all. But to argue that ASP is just as easy as CF because you can copy and paste from Google hits is, I'm sorry, ridiculous. ASP development may have become easier because of this, but that's more a reflection of its community rather than any innate simplicity in the language. Jim Davis ---------------------------------------------------------- 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]
