(Sorry - I'm going to fight the HTML this time. I'm a plain-text snob.)
;^)
Actually you claimed I said "setting properties" was advanced, I didn't. I
said that finding/knowing which object to use in the first place was "rather
advanced". But leave that, it's not important.
The task itself (or any piece of it) is not advanced. But the concepts
behind the task in ASP are "rather advanced" - to understand what's going on
you need to get, even if only at the most basic level, several programming
and OO concepts.
Are you suggesting that ASP is "easy" because Google exists? I would argue
a subtle distinction: Google makes using difficult things easier, but it
doesn't actually make the thing easier.
I'm also not saying there is a huge difference. I'm not suggesting that,
for example, that ASP is "twice as hard" as CF - only that there is a
difference (any difference) for the audience in question. I'm suggesting
that, in the case described (an HTML designer wanting to do some simple
tasks) that ColdFusion provides the capabilities required for those tasks
without any additional conceptual understanding required (or implied).
I am talking about an understanding of the task - I don't really find the
topic interesting without that. If I found assembler code to send email on
Google would that too make assembly as easy as CF? No, of course not. Rote
copy with no depth just isn't interesting (to me).
My points are not about the real world practicalities or shortcuts available
but the paradigms involved. At the core is this language "easy" to
understand? Easy for who? Easier than what? Why?
Classic ASP has poor documentation (especially when it comes to objects
available to do tasks) compared to CF, it just does. It stresses that you
can get objects to do anything, but is a little stingy about specifying them
(giving a choice on any topic when the criteria are beyond your
comprehension is confusing and frustrating).
I LOVE the MSDN library (it's my HTML, DHTML and JavaScript reference of
choice) but MS was never as clear in its ASP documentation as Allaire was in
the CF.
CF presents a shallower learning curve in this respect. You have to
remember, for example, "CF + concept". "CFMail" sends mail, "CFQuery"
performs queries, "CFoutput" outputs data. You might get confused by
synonyms or entirely new concepts ("CFLock" anyone?), but care has been
taken to make things as "discoverable" as possible in the core language.
Since classic ASP leverages system objects so much no such care was taken.
The objects were designed and implemented for Windows developers, not web
application developers. This was actually a HUGE boon to Windows developers
(VB people for example) but more difficult for complete novices. This was
by design - ASP was designed to let traditional programmers transition to
web applications. ColdFusion was designed to let traditional web page
designers transition to web applications.
Both languages have grown and "reached out" the other side (ASP.net does a
lot for the designer and CF 7.x does a lot for the programmer) but they
still show their roots in many ways.
I really do agree with the rest of what you say. But I feel like your
getting hung up on the example (sending email) when I was trying to talk
about the concepts.
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]
