> Yes, my main concern about XFB is that the fuseboxes do in fact have to
> be nested. That means if I want to re-use my login circuit in multiple
> applications, I have to make multiple COPIES of it nested in each app.
> If I can just use CFMODULE to call the login app, then I can just have
> one copy and one alone.
Lee,
Yep... although to be fair, that isn't solely an XFB issue. How many times
have we seen folks ask something like "Why would I want to call my app as a
custom tag?" That leads me to believe that Hal is far from the only one
building Fuseboxes that eschew custom tag access.
Perhaps because Steve's early documentation was rather dense and somewhat
inadequate to convey the full scope of his incredibly clever idea, we've
ended up with a lot of folks who think that reusing a Fusebox module simply
means moving dsp_ and act_ files (or entire circuits) from app to app. They
routinely overlook the *real* power of the thing... the ability to expose a
Fusebox's services to external applications through a consistent and
straightforward custom tag interface.
Of course, that's a very CF-ish point of view. As Fusebox expands to other
platforms, the number of people who *can't* use a custom tag interface will
swell and potentially dwarf the number of folks who simply *don't*... and at
that point, you start to get a real philosophical schism. This debate over
the attributes scope is just a preview of future developments.
--
Roger
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
