Hey, wait a sec -- you guys are hiding something from me!
Thus far, the only reasons I've been given for the use of
circuits.cfm is "Because, theoretically, it could save
work for me if I move a circuit, although admittedly it
could cause more work for me if I want to add a new
circuit."
Now I know that can't possibly be the original motivation
behind circuits. Its logic is not superior enough to have
originated from HAL9000. It is obviously a distraction
created by Stan Cox, who is bent on overthowing XFB and
replacing it with his IcyFuzianBox Regime.
So honestly, guys: What are you hiding from me? What's
the real reason for using circuts.cfm?
Patrick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick McElhaney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 10:04 AM
> To: Fusebox
> Subject: RE: Nesting circuits: I just don't get it! :(
>
>
> Maybe I'm asking the question the wrong way. Why DON'T you
> just call a circuit by its fully qualified name?
>
> 1) Because you don't think it's possible (without
> prohibitively complex code)?
>
> 2) Because there are DISADVANTAGES to using fully qualified
> names?
>
> 3) Because there are ADVANTAGES to two part names?
>
> 4) Because it never occurred to you? (This is actually the
> impression I get from reading Hal's XFB 101.)
>
>
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
