It sounds like a lot of great enhancements are planned for 2.4. Congrats to you and the entire FarCry community - especially for such an ambitious timeline!
We're still trying to decide if we push the timeline or cut the functionality -- but you're right, its ambitious at this stage.
+ Review the code to ensure that all CFC methods are fully tagged. By this, I mean that all relevant attributes such as Access, returnType, Hint, etc. are used consistently. I would be willing to help out with this effort.
Absolutely agree. Would love the help.
+ I would love to see more encapsulation in the FarCry CFCs. By this I mean refactoring the code such that application and session scoped variables aren't referenced directly inside of CFC methods, but are instead passed in as arguments. This will take some doing, and probably won't make sense until there are unit tests developed for FarCry.
Unit tests we need. Many of the refs to the application scope variables in the CFCF methods are to default global vars. The idea is you should be able to override the argument by providing one, otherwise it defaults to the application environment variable. But its highly likely even this approach is not used everywhere.
Several of the current CFC incarnations were conversions of tag libraries to a CFC -- there are certainly some less-than-elegant approaches in there that need to be reworked,
+ Drop the mixing of tags and cfscript within CFCs. We've coded several of our applications over the last year or so this way too, and are now finding that as we try to build tools to help us automate certain tasks (in CFEclipse), having to parse CFCs that have both tags and cfscript blocks in the same methods is a bit problematic. While some of our developers prefer the cfscript style syntax, the reality is that Macromedia has basically said that there won't be further enhancements to cfscript (in any meaningful way). Because of that, I think it makes sense to try to keep the coding style in FarCry CFCs consistent and make use of tags over cfscript.
Personally -- I'm a tag man. I like CFSCRIPT for certain types of work (variable assignments, conditional logic and so on) but I'm not a fan of writing functions to emulate tag behaviours for the sole purpose of remaining in a CFSCRIPT block.
I believe the general feeling of the current group of committers is the same. So with any luck we should see less and less of this in the code base.
-- geoff http://www.daemon.com.au/
--- You are currently subscribed to farcry-dev as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
