Coming in late here. I haven't used CFC that much (we're in the process of migrating) but I imagine there are benefits for using CFCs. For example testing, in the java world and other languages its easier to do unit testing. With CFCs, by moving more logic into CFCs it makes it easier to do unit testing on the different components as well as testing the integration of new functionality.
There are some good reasons as to why some developers are calling for CFCs to be real objects. For example in Java you can program to interfaces which allows you to change the implementation without changing the code which uses it. so you can have a CFC which says I don't care what you send me as long as it implements this interface allowing you to change/extend what ever is passed in to the CFC without breaking existing code. But I think it needs to be all or nothing. And I agree there is a suspicious lack of direction of how to use CFCs coming from MM. After all if you have Java programmers on your team why would you use CFCs instead? Why not wrap existing Java object calls in CFCs? Just my 20p Kola >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: 03 July 2003 16:23 >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] CFC's was RE: [ cf-dev ] so.... >> >> Started with 5, moved on to MX recently. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 4:17 PM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] CFC's was RE: [ cf-dev ] so.... >> >> >> >> which version of CF are you using? >> >> >> Duncan Cumming >> IT Manager >> >> http://www.alienationdesign.co.uk >> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Tel: 0141 575 9700 >> Fax: 0141 575 9600 >> >> Creative solutions in a technical world >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Get your domain names online from: >> http://www.alienationdomains.co.uk >> Reseller options available! >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> gsi.gov.uk To: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> cc: >> >> 03/07/2003 16:16 Subject: RE: [ cf-dev >> ] >> CFC's was RE: [ cf-dev ] so.... >> Please respond to >> >> dev >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> You and your CF Fun .. We gonna be hearin' about it for months >> lol....zzzzzzz ... I though sci fi conventions were nerdy, but Coldfusion >> ones? That goes beyond.. Mind you, you could always pretend that it was >> some sort of Physics conference and impress your mates who aint techies I >> suppose! ;) >> >> I'm mainly a designer (not strictly a programmer) although I do know my >> actionScript and have some knowledge of basic OO and Asp.. I have only >> been >> using Coldfusion for 5 months and have found it to be extremely friendly, >> based mainly on a bit of lateral thinking and can work on many different >> levels (from my newbie status, right through to you top computer >> scientists >> out there)...I feel that's the beauty of it. The way you can get up and >> running and see results quickly. In some ways this is much better than >> other languages, which are often rather inpenetrable in terms of their >> syntax. Hell, Coldfusion makes Evil ASP look like a far lower level >> language than it is >> >> I found that Dreamweaver's processes for writing Coldfusion (although >> probably frowned upon by you hardcore boys and girls out there) has >> taught >> me all the basics about Coldfusion and is a pretty good place to start if >> you have never touched it before. Of course it isn't ideal, but for the >> Newbie it certainly does the trick. I have since moved on to handcoding >> as >> Dreamweaver doesn't really do very specific things via it's wizards. >> >> In terms of learning new languages I tend to teach myself, the downside >> of >> this, like with anything else is that it is easy to teach yourself bad >> habits. I'd say that learning about OO/modular programming (Not simply >> CF) >> will get your head in the right place for you to design robust code no >> matter what language it is written in. Once you are re-using chunks of >> code >> across projects I reckon you are on the right track to being a "proper" >> coder, whatever that is... >> >> Being a creative often makes coding tricky...that leftbrain/rightbrain >> tradeoff I guess, but also it can lead one to odd methods to accomplish >> things that perhaps the more technically minded person may >> overlook....Generally, in my case it makes for pretty badly formed and >> shoddy old code...But hey, what's the point in doing something if you >> aint >> learning from it? >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Damian Watson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 3:46 PM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: [ cf-dev ] CFC's was RE: [ cf-dev ] so.... >> >> >> I totally agree Paul. As someone said a while back, not all CF developers >> have a programming background, without real world examples easliy >> available >> and well documented one ends up programming to what one knows. I assume >> most >> of us don't have time to be bogged down in learning from scratch from >> books, >> but we have a lot of catching up to do with the old skool programmers and >> the thinking behind applications. >> >> I saw Raymond Camden talk about CFCs at CFUN and it was useful, for >> instance >> he went through the use of web services, but other than that I didn't get >> a >> nice easy, this is how it works in simple language and these are the >> things >> it does for you. >> >> It's much easier to learn when you are given a good overview of the >> purpose >> of what you're learning, and I haven't found anything yet that is >> particularly helpful. I agree with Simon that CF web applications should >> grow up a little (when needed) but we need much better literature (online >> and offline). Why don't you write a book Simon- you're good at explaining >> stuff ;0) >> >> d >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Paul Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 3:16 PM >> Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] CFC's was RE: [ cf-dev ] so.... >> >> >> :D >> >> I love CFMX and think that it's a definite improvement on the prior >> versions >> of CF. However the issues are: >> >> A) training >> B) marketing >> >> The training and marketing of CFMX is still aiming at the wrong people - >> ie >> new developers, HTML developers - and not aimed at people who've been >> doing >> CF since version -2.93. Not only that, but I don't think there is enough >> output from MM on real-world scenarios and (as has already been said) >> best-practices or anything like that. It's there, but not wonderfully >> accessible. >> >> I think CFC's are a fantastic idea, and a really useful tool. I have >> made >> a >> few test CFC's on my machine and like them. However, I have had no >> reason >> to use them in a real world application, because there is not enough CFMX >> out there that is being used with the clients I am working with. Maybe >> it's >> just my clients, but if MM really wanted lots of people to be using >> CFC's, >> they'd be giving people free/cheap upgrades to MX, promoting madly to try >> and get people on board etc. >> >> They aren't! They are marketing it as "It's CF, just better" and it >> needs >> to be sorted out if MM want us to make more of it! I place the >> responsibility for the lack of training and understanding of these tools >> firmly at MM's feet. However, I doubt if they will change much because >> of >> what I've said! >> >> Whatever happened to "Here's a real world CFC that you can use" or >> "Here's >> all the features of CFMX in a complete real-world application" or >> something >> rather than trying to explain the best ways to use Flash as a front end >> (which imho is actually far less useful to most of the CF Developers I >> know!). >> >> Paul >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > Sent: 03 July 2003 15:02 >> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] CFC's was RE: [ cf-dev ] so.... >> > >> > >> > >> > this is a good debate. i think there's still a big market >> > for ye olde CF >> > 5. the beauty of CF used to be that a complete newbie could >> > probably install the server and get their first CF page up >> > and running in a very short space of time. If you could >> > understand an HTML tag and the basics of Iteration, >> > Selection, Sequence, then you knew enough to understand the >> > majority of CFML. >> > >> > I don't know the same could be said of CFMX, and I think >> > it'll deter any newbies from picking it up. Existing CF >> > heads can maybe manage, but anyone who's got to learn their >> > first server-side application language are probably more >> > likely than ever before to go with PHP. >> > >> > just my 2pence. >> > >> > >> > Duncan Cumming >> > IT Manager >> > >> > http://www.alienationdesign.co.uk >> > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > Tel: 0141 575 9700 >> > Fax: 0141 575 9600 >> > >> > Creative solutions in a technical world >> > >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > Get your domain names online from: http://www.alienationdomains.co.uk >> > Reseller options available! >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > "Paul Johnston" >> > >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > tions.com> cc: >> > >> > Subject: >> > RE: [ cf-dev ] CFC's was RE: [ cf-dev ] so.... >> > 03/07/2003 14:39 >> > >> > Please respond to >> > >> > dev >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > I am not sure if it's whether we use their "full power" >> > or whether >> > > > they are actually not that "useful" for the majority of sites. >> > > >> > > Its interesting. Many developers aren't sure whether their old apps >> > > should now be using CFCs, or any new ones should be, or >> > whether they >> > > should be using them at all. >> > >> > Very true.... >> > >> > I don't see the point in using some of the "features" of >> > coldfusion for the majority of sites that I write. Now, that >> > may be my clients not currently using MX, or it may be that >> > the extra "features" of MX are actually not that important to >> > the majority of clients! There are issues of stability etc, >> > and also some useful coding features, but CFC's are not and >> > don't appear to be a major factor in upgrading from 5 to MX >> > or transferring from another app server to MX. >> > >> > Paul >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ >> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ >> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> -- >> ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> PLEASE NOTE: THE ABOVE MESSAGE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE INTERNET. >> >> On entering the GSI, this email was scanned for viruses by the Government >> Secure Intranet (GSI) virus scanning service supplied exclusively by >> Cable >> & >> Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. >> >> GSI users see >> http://www.gsi.gov.uk/main/notices/information/gsi-003-2002.pdf for >> further >> details. In case of problems, please call your organisational IT helpdesk >> >> -- >> ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> PLEASE NOTE: THE ABOVE MESSAGE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE INTERNET. >> >> On entering the GSI, this email was scanned for viruses by the Government >> Secure Intranet (GSI) virus scanning service supplied exclusively by >> Cable & >> Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. >> >> GSI users see >> http://www.gsi.gov.uk/main/notices/information/gsi-003-2002.pdf for >> further >> details. In case of problems, please call your organisational IT helpdesk >> >> -- >> ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
