Your statement is EXACTLY what I had inferred from reading the 4.5 documentation. However, I thought that perhaps something had changed in the new cf5.0, and so my docs were out of date.
FYI The programmer stated that he felt that things would be simpler if we used cfmod instead of cfinclude. The implied change there is that all my included code has to be changed to think in the form of a custom tag. I do have custom tags, where it is relevant/important for the "function calls" code to be in its own workspace. When a separate workspace is not needed, or wanted, it just complicates things by requiring the passing of values, and returning of results. With an object oriented mentality, custom tags or cfmod have the effect of "black box"'ing the different pages, whereas cfinclude just melds all into one big long strip of code in a common workspace. Terry Fielder Network Engineer Great Gulf Homes / Ashton Woods Homes [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Steve Budan > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 10:04 AM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [CFTALKTor] cfinclude VS cfmod > > > hmmm I thought cfmod was a different way of calling custom > tags, ie without > the cf_filename > if you call 'em with cf_ they must reside either in the same > directory as > the calling page or in the custom tags folder. I'm not sure > if a mapped dir > would be searched as well, but I think so. Using the cfmod, you are > explicitly specifying where the file is. So no need for > mappings or access > to the custom tags dir or mappings. cfmod is the way to go in a shared > hosted environment. If you run the server its what ever you > prefer. I prefer > to either use the custom tags folder or have the tag in the > same dir as the > calling page. > > How cfmod would replace cfinclude I have no idea. In fact I > thought they > were very different. cfinclude physically includes the code > and shares the > page scope, cfmod and custom tags have their own scope and > its own specail > tags etc. > > I would love to hear what argument was presented to you re > using cfmod over > cfinclude > > -steve > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 8:07 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [CFTALKTor] cfinclude VS cfmod > > > It has been suggested to me that I use cfmod instead of > cfinclude to include > other pages/code in my apps and control program flow. > > Does anyone have any insight into the benefits/pitfalls of > using cfmod as > opposed to the good old cfinclude? > > Thanks in advance > > Terry Fielder > Network Engineer > Great Gulf Homes / Ashton Woods Homes > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - > You are subscribed to the CFUGToronto CFTALK ListSRV. > This message has been posted by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Unsubscribe, Please Visit and Login to http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ > Manager: Kevin Towes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ > This System has been donated by Infopreneur, Inc. > (http://www.infopreneur.net) > - > You are subscribed to the CFUGToronto CFTALK ListSRV. > This message has been posted by: Steve Budan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To Unsubscribe, Please Visit and Login to http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ > Manager: Kevin Towes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ > This System has been donated by Infopreneur, Inc. > (http://www.infopreneur.net) > - You are subscribed to the CFUGToronto CFTALK ListSRV. This message has been posted by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, Please Visit and Login to http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ Manager: Kevin Towes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ This System has been donated by Infopreneur, Inc. (http://www.infopreneur.net)
