Yah. Is good.
The only problemo comes with cfparaming input vars. I suppose that can just
happen in the index just above the cfobject call, but it might get messy.
Do as ye please.
Nat Papovich
ICQ 32676414
"I'm for truth no matter who tells it."
-Malcolm X, 1965
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 7:01 AM
To: Fusebox
Subject: <cfobject> in the index.cfm
There is a thread on cf-talk about Fusebox. Dave Watts a long time
'disbeliever' in fusebox brought up a good point...
He uses a lot of <cfobject> calls and doesn't see the point in having a
file with a single line on it for calling the <cfobject> tag. Because
that's "encapsulating the encapsulation". The more i thought about it,
the more I realize he's totally right. I think we should add to the
fusebox specs: make <cfobject> calls directly from the <cfcase>
statements in the index.cfm files.
The reason is that <cfobject> calls are essentially like a <cfmodule> or
<cfinclude> or a <cf_sometag> call in that the <cfobject> itself
contains the business logic.
What does everyone think?
If we do this should there be a naming convention for classes in
<cfobject>?
Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/fusebox or
send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in
the body.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/fusebox or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
