Hal and I have spent many many many hours discussing different
techniques. The two versions will combine after some concerns are ironed
out and some more powerful ideas are added in. The next few months
should be pretty sweet for the Fusebox community.
Steve
William J Wheatley wrote:
>
> Well Extended Fusebox is HALS FUSEBOX =) and
> PLAIN fusebox is STEVES FUSEBOX and
> soon there will be a fusebox civil war to see whos fusebox is better
> lol =)
>
> Nah I think all fusebox will eventually move into the extended format, but
> either way works =)
>
> Bill Wheatley
> Director of Development
> Allaire Certified ColdFusion Developer
> AEPS INC
> Allaire ColdFusion Consulting Partner
> www.aeps.com
> www.aeps2000.com
> 954-472-6684 X303
> ICQ: 417645
>
> "When God put you on this earth, he knew what you would be.
> You would be the driver of the black No. 3.
> Now you drive in heaven, racing for the Lord.
> I only hope that God didn't put you in a Ford."
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Toby Tremayne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Fusebox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 6:12 PM
> Subject: RE: learning
>
> > Thanks for all the feedback guys,
> >
> > The way I've beenw orking so far, is I demonstrated the concepts of cold
> > fusion, and the systems behind it, showed how they would be applied in the
> > fusebox methodology. I teach (read: Preach) fusebox as the methodology
> and
> > standards of choice. The way I see it, I'm training everyone in my
> company
> > who's either a programmer or a designer or something in between, so
> here's
> > my opportunity to make everyone program the way I want them to <grin>
> lower
> > case tags, mixed case and underscored variable names, fusebox,
> documentation
> > etc etc etc - all those things that make code easier to write and to read.
> > It's pretty fun and it means we get a team of people who work well
> together
> > as their standards are developing together.
> >
> > I make sure that CF and fusebox are separated, and usually in
> demonstrating
> > a concept such as forms or whatever I will show the simple method of
> posting
> > from one page to the other to get the point across - then follow it up
> with
> > the slightly more advanced and better way to do it using fusebox. I have
> to
> > say, everyone is pretty receptive, and they take it in because it makes
> > sense to do it that way. I've found that teaching fusebox with CF
> > eliminates most of those situations where someone asks why you do what
> > you're doing and you can't really answer them <g>.
> >
> > One thing though - I myself haven't learned every aspect of Fusebox, I'm
> > still getting into the fusedocs and the dot notation ideas etc. I just
> > managed to get my head around the exitFuseactions yesterday (I've only
> seen
> > the extended fusebox tutorial and it didn't go hugely into the workings of
> > it) so I haven't taught them that yet. I leave some of the more complex
> > ideas out for the moment, to tie in with them when we get into more
> complex
> > CF. Does anyone think that's going to cause me problems down the line?
> >
> >
> >
> > Toby Tremayne
> > Code Poet and Zen Master of the Heavy Sleep
> > Show Ads Interactive
> > 359 Plummer St
> > Port Melbourne
> > VIC 3207
> > P +61 3 9245 1247
> > F +61 3 9646 9814
> > ICQ UIN 13107913
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: William J Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, 1 March 2001 7:06 AM
> > To: Fusebox
> > Subject: Re: learning
> >
> >
> > But if while you are teaching the person CF and FB at the same time as
> long
> > as you teach them properly you will
> > be able to help them know that FB is NOT part of CF but a methology. A
> good
> > teacher is one who can help them distinguish
> > between what CF is and what the methology is. Because if you have someone
> > learning them together you dont give them to the chance to pick up any bad
> > habits that they would have to break. And they will write it and might not
> > know what good it would do if they are not totally in sync with why use
> > fusebox, but once again a good teacher can help that, but one day down the
> > road they will see why to use fusebox and what good it does.
> >
> > That why i feel it would be more beneficial to teach both together.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bill Wheatley
> > Director of Development
> > AEPS INC
> > Allaire ColdFusion Consulting Partner
> > Allaire Certified ColdFusion Developer
> > http://www.aeps.com
> > ICQ: 417645
> > http://www.aeps2000.com
> > 954-472-6684 X303
> >
> > IMPORTANT NOTICE:
> > This e-mail and any attachment to it is intended only to be read or used
> by
> > the named addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally
> privileged
> > information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any
> > mistaken transmission to you. If you receive this e-mail in error, please
> > immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must
> not
> > disclose, copy or use any part of this e-mail if you are not the intended
> > recipient. The RTA is not responsible for any unauthorized alterations to
> > this e-mail or attachment to it
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John Quarto-vonTivadar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Fusebox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 2:56 PM
> > Subject: RE: learning
> >
> >
> > > I definitely agree with Alan's comment.
> > >
> > > There is also something to be said for the other side, which is that if
> > they
> > > learn FB and CF together they may never distinguish the two again. Now,
> > this
> > > may not be a bad thing for a FB-based development group, but they may
> have
> > a
> > > hard integrating into a non-FB (dare I call it a "free-for-all") group.
> > SO
> > > my thought would be that you teach them pure CF and let them do a
> project
> > or
> > > two on their own. Get the concepts down. *THEN* show them FB which
> they'll
> > > then say "wow, why didnt you show us this earlier?" which is exactly the
> > > response you want. The last thing you want to do, since you're trying to
> > > help these newbies out, is to have them end up at a interview sometime
> > where
> > > they have no idea that FB is NOT part of CF. (for good or ill, there are
> a
> > > lot of big CF names out there who are NOT proponents of FB for any
> numbers
> > > of reasons)
> > >
> > > This is consistent with the theory that you never really learn something
> > > until you do it wrong first. If someone hands you too clean a solution
> you
> > > rarely understand why that solution *was* the solution in the first
> place
> > >
> > > >
> > > > You da man! I only -wish- I had learned FB simultaneously with CF.
> Every
> > > > time I look at one of my pre-FB apps floating around out there, ugh!
> > Gimme
> > > > that back!
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Toby Tremayne [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 4:57 PM
> > > > > To: Fusebox
> > > > > Subject: learning
> > > > >
> > > > > I was talking to a colleague here about teaching a few other
> > > > people in our
> > > > > company cold fusion. What I had thought was Id teach the coldfusion
> > > > > concepts and fusebox concepts at the same time - "this is cold
> > > > fusion and
> > > > > this is the way we write it" sort of thing. Does anyone see any
> > > > > difficulty
> > > > > with teaching the two at once? Or does it make more sense to tech
> > cold
> > > > > fusion then bring them round to fusebox.
> > > > >
> > > > > My personal opinion was that to teach fusebox later on would be
> > > > > silly, as
> > > > > I'd have to then RE-educate everyone...
> > > > >
> > > > > But I'd be interested to hear what everyone thinks
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
