I agree with you, Matt. I think that is seems like a good idea at first
because it makes it more convenient. However, I think that it is
probably to allow a framework to do what it does best and just that.
Bringing in a function to evaluate ColdFusion functions in the XML code
just makes it more confusing for the developer that has to maintain
it..."CF code in the xml file?"

Kyle Hayes 
ColdFusion Developer
WebAID - Anaheim 
Boeing Information Technology 
714.762.2894 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 


-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Woodward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 12:39 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [coldspring-dev] An Idea: CF-native functions in the CS XML

To me (and also partially just playing devil's advocate here) the
inclusion of native CF functions and constructs in the XML muddies the
waters, perhaps unnecessarily or with too little benefit to justify
doing it.  Have you run into anything that you *can't* do that this
approach would solve, or is this method of doing things just more
convenient in some cases in your mind?

On 9/22/06, Jared Rypka-Hauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just talked to Chris about this and he suggested I post it to the 
> list to see what sort of response it gets... "run it up the flagpole 
> and see who salutes" I guess. ;)
>
> I'm thinking that it would be very handy sometimes to use CF-native 
> functions in the XML as arguments to property or constructor-arg 
> tags... like this:
>
> <property name="inputArray">
>     <value>$${listToArray("1,2,3,4,5")}</value>
> </property>
>
> The $${} would work like the $${} syntax does in CFE snippets... 
> except that asking for user input, CS would ask CF to evaluate 
> whatever lies between { and }. There are various times when this would

> be handy, especially since it could be used like this:
>
> <value>myString_$${createUUID()}</value>
>
> It may need to be restricted by what's returned from
> getFunctionsList() (if that actually works right these days, cuz once 
> upon a time it didn't)... otherwise you might end up with people doing

> things like this:
>
> <value>$${this.getSomeProperty()}</value>
> <value>$${session.userId}</value>
>
> The main reason I asked was because I wanted to do something like 
> this:
>
> <constructor-arg name="LogFileName">
> <value>MyObjectResultLog_$${now()}</value>
> </constructor-arg>
>
> Just a thought... don't worry about shooting it down if you don't like

> it, it's no big deal.
>
> Laterz,
> J
>
>


--
Matt Woodward
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mattwoodward.com


Reply via email to