I have looked at mach-ii and it seems to offer all the benefits of OOP, as you say salvatore.
I have already built a few apps in FB 4 and am wondering if instead of carrying on down this route I should try mach-ii instead? I have Java programming experience so the idea of OOP is appealing but I like the way FuseBox works. Apart from the design principles and uncoupling of presentation / logic / content (FB 4 support MVC really well already), what are the other real-world benefits? Kind regards, Sam -----Original Message----- From: ing. fusto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 April 2004 11:15 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ cf-dev ] FuseBox fusebox (4 too) are procedural tools at all, machii allows an oop design and development of applications and allows easily the use of techiques such as high choesion and low coupling of classes, each other and from application, design pattern as MVC and composite views, anf so on. it' s not difficult to understand and use, also for inexpertise oop programmers. best regards salvatore ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 12:08 PM Subject: [ cf-dev ] FuseBox > Hi All,<BR><BR>I noticed that there is some talk on these threads of mach-ii. I just wondered if anybody has been using FuseBox 4. <BR><BR>Any feedback / thoughts? -- These lists are syncronised with the CFDeveloper forum at http://forum.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ CFDeveloper Sponsors and contributors:- *Hosting and support provided by CFMXhosting.co.uk* :: *ActivePDF provided by activepdf.com* *Forums provided by fusetalk.com* :: *ProWorkFlow provided by proworkflow.com* *Tutorials provided by helmguru.com* :: *Lists hosted by gradwell.com* To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
