I think it's definitely useful in many situations (ColdMock uses it extensively to handle method calls to mock objects for example). I just don't like the idea of having an object's API be largely unspecified. I think that when folks get to see Bolt in action, with the introspection/code hinting that Adobe has alluded to, CFC's that have large chunks of their API handled by oMM are going to feel left out in the cold, since there is no way for the IDE to provide hinting for them. I also think that if we see implicit getters and setters in CF9, this will also go a long way toward dealing with the issue since the "I don't want to type/generate all that code" argument goes out the window. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next year!
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Alan Livie <[email protected]> wrote: > @Jared, without going into implementation details can you share with us the > types of situations you have seen oMM() used in? > > Alan > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
