While that's a benefit, it doesn't protect you from naming collisions between fields and methods.
I like having a separate struct (I always use 'my' - an old habit) for two reasons. First, I put instance state into the 'my' scope, and I put transient state (constants, for example) into the variables scope directly. This always gives access to just the instance state. Second, it helps when reading, the 'my' prefix clearly indicates that the variable in question is NOT a local var or an argument, it's an instance variable. I endeavour to always use a 'variables' prefix for the variables scope, a 'my' or 'variables.my' prefix for the 'my' scope, and then the only unscoped references are either local or query vars. cheers, barneyb On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Henry <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Feb 10, 3:29 pm, Jared Rypka-Hauer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It's easier to dump data without dumping funcitons. :) > > Charlie's presentation just reminded me that <cfdump showUDFs = "yes| > no"> is added to CF8. And that's why I ask this question to see if > this new cfdump attribute alone can justify not using > variables.instance anymore. :) > > > Henry Ho > > > -- Barney Boisvert [email protected] http://www.barneyb.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
