I think Sean brings up a really great point here. In very data centric
applications (bunch of forms and reports) a light mvc pattern to help
seperate your model and view might be all you need. Maybe only certain
features will follow a pattern. Its your job to learn the patterns and as
Sean said always be mindful of them.

"if you have a very data-centric app with almost
no "behavior" (i.e., it's almost pure data entry or pure reporting)
then OO might be a waste of time for you - or maybe only parts of the
app will benefit from OO, perhaps at a very high level in the service
layer."

Thank You
Dan Vega
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.danvega.org

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Peter Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Thats why I tend to prefer code gen/frameworks that start with a
> description of the model and then gen any persistence required if your use
> case (read no DBA and a green field app) allows it.
> Best Wishes,
> Peter
>
>
> On Jun 24, 2008, at 1:49 PM, Brian Kotek wrote:
>
> This is caused in a large part by the code generators that introspect the
> database and generate CFCs. While those can be great time saving tools, the
> reality is that most people just take what gets generated and then run with
> it without thinking further about what they're doing.
>
> This is why we get people with 5 CFCs for every single table in their
> database, and why people think that just because they're following these
> "patterns" (bean, DAO, etc.) that they are doing OOP. If everything is
> data-centric and there is no actual behavior in the objects, then all one
> really has is a totally procedural, data-centric application that has been
> shoved into CFCs. It really ends up being the worst of both worlds: all the
> complexity of OO with none of the benefits.
>
> Hal is completely correct that we need to get away from the fixation on
> data or slavishly following patterns without really understanding the
> tradeoffs involved. Each pattern has consequences, and not all of them are
> good. The unfortunate reality is that truly groking OOP takes a long time
> and a major shift in mindset. There's no easy route to getting there, but
> one route that is probably among the most difficult is to blindly apply
> patterns or let code generators "do the work" without truly understanding
> what's going on or why these patterns exist.
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Dan Vega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Adam,
>> I am sure you going to hear some slack for that but I am huge fan of what
>> you just said. In Hal Helm's presentation he noted that we really need to
>> quite being so data centric when thinking of OO development. MVC is a great
>> start for people to solve a specific problem but everyone really needs to
>> stop following everyone and thinking that 5 cfcs are OO development. I am
>> doing a lot of research at the moment about OO in other languages and hope
>> to share my findings soon.
>>
>> Thank You
>> Dan Vega
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://www.danvega.org
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Adam Haskell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> At the end of the day we all need to stop talking about DOA and Gateways
>>> and all this Database crap as much as we do. Its old, trite, and quite
>>> honestly doesn't make a hill of beans difference most of the time. Honestly,
>>> ask yourself, "How many applications would I have been completely screwed if
>>> I chose to split my gateway and DAO up, or vice versa?" If you have a use
>>> case for that please by all means share it I'd love to hear it. If all we
>>> are concerned about is DAO or gateway then chances are something else, much
>>> more important, is being overlooked (not pointing fingers at anyone here :)
>>> ). If all you are doing is a large reporting app chances are you don't need
>>> to be doing complete OO anyway, yes I know sacrilege. Its true though
>>> ColdFusion is perfect for reporting without the heavy OO we try to apply to
>>> it in too many cases. Thinking back through some of the reporting apps I did
>>> and shoehorning them into an OO architecture I can confidently say I should
>>> have stuck with a light version of MVC and moved on.
>>>
>>> Adam Haskell
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"CFCDev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/cfcdev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to