Kevan, > Right, the methodCode/contactType string is actually coming > from the db and is used to create the object. That's what I > was trying to get at above :).
Oh, I see. Yes, there are certainly some use cases where this is the best solution. I would avoid it wherever possible as it makes code much harder to read, but if you really need rapid reconfiguration and can justify the maintenance overhead, that's a reasonable way to do it. > The if block approach seems good for handling type/object > logical mappings during object creation, but I also had in > mind another scenario - suppose you have a common set of > files for each type: > EmailContact.cfc, EmailContactValidator.cfc, > emailContactForm.cfm PhoneContact.cfc, > PhoneContactValidator.cfc, phoneContactForm.cfm > SMSContact.cfc, SMSContactValidator.cfc, smsContactForm.cfm > > At the moment I can only think of using the naming convention > approach to prevent duplicating the if block where each of > the files is used. > Any suggestions in this case? > Still only one if block. Without imputing a fully fleshed out model from a pretty sketchy scenario, the general approach is that you end up with a factory object that can give you all the bits you need. The one if block is needed at the point you instantiate the factory object. A very simple approach is to make the Contact the factory for all the other objects (validator, form etc) (this is a poor design in some respects, but it illustrates the priniciple. Jaime --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
