I pretty much disagree. Farcry's COAPI is fairly well documented, and it's pretty easy to see that it is a metadata-based persistance framework (e.g. we use cfproperty, which Farcry uses to figure out how to store your object in the database).
Extending the "core" is pretty damn easy (whether you mean extending core objects or creating new ones, it's the same concept anyways). Basically, I'm not sure what work could be done on the core to make it easier to use. -dave >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5/7/2004 9:50:12 AM >>> I've been following the Typo3 discussion, and while I agree that FarCry would benefit from some additional features, what I as a FarCry developer would love to see is a set of coding standards and some sort of consensus on architecture. One of the hardest things, I've found, while learning FarCry is getting a grip on the architecture. I realize that FarCry is in a growing stage, but as it stands now the architecture is very rough and lacks any overarching design consistency. I think if we were to work on the core, making it easier to understand, use, and extend, we would see more extensions. Just my .02 --Nathan --- You are currently subscribed to farcry-dev as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MXDU2004 + Macromedia DevCon AsiaPac + Sydney, Australia http://www.mxdu.com/ + 24-25 February, 2004 --- You are currently subscribed to farcry-dev as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MXDU2004 + Macromedia DevCon AsiaPac + Sydney, Australia http://www.mxdu.com/ + 24-25 February, 2004
