If that's the real problem then it's just a matter of some simple code
rewrites.
I just changed my copy to put everything into the attributes scope, and
it seems to work fine. Is anyone using the #request.attributeslist#
variable? We could deprecate that once we move over to the structure
based solution, because it won't be necessary.
Steve Nelson
Jeff Peters wrote:
>
> On 23 Mar 2001, at 11:04, Steve Nelson wrote:
>
> > Let me bring up the question again.... What problem are we trying to
> > solve?
>
> My tests tell me there's no real performance hit with formurl2attributes, so I
> see the problem in two parts:
>
> 1. The "attributes" scope as generated by formurl2attributes isn't the
> Attributes scope, so you can't do loop operations over an attributes structure
> and see all form, url, and attributes variables.
>
> 2. Formurl2attributes creates copies of form and url variables, thus doubling
> the server memory used for those scopes in Fusebox apps. I'd much rather see a
> means to use a structure of pointers that would cover form-, url-, and
> attributes-scoped variables. This would accomplish the same goals as using the
> current approach, while streamlining memory use and providing a complete
> structure for accessing variables "passed into" a Fusebox module.
>
> That's the problem I'd like to solve. It's not a showstopper, but it has
> important implications.
>
> - Jeff
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
