>Now, if you did this with CF, and created a CF writer,
>most likely you'd also have "everything but the kitchen
>sink" code, with a ton of CFSETs for everything
>imaginable, and a lot of redundancy.
That's been done. It's called Macromedia Dreamweaver Ultradev. It's a
WYSIWIG layout tool that can write CFML (or ASP or JSP) for you. But the
source code this app generates is huge. I used it last year to create a
simple toy store and the code for the check out page is a whopping 43K, one
page with over 1000 lines of code.
Brian Shearer
Custom Data Systems, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: McCollough, Alan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 9:15 AM
To: Fusebox
Subject: RE: Fwd: extreme programming
Actually, every time you print something you are doing this. Both PostScript
and PCL are languages designed to be machine generated, and machine
interpreted. Humans can write wicked-fast PostScript that takes up 1% the
space of machine generate code, which tends to be pretty bloated.
Now, if you did this with CF, and created a CF writer, most likely you'd
also have "everything but the kitchen sink" code, with a ton of CFSETs for
everything imaginable, and a lot of redundancy.
Unlike laser printers, though, with a web environment, sending 1mb of code
when 50k would do is not a good idea. It might be OK to wait 1 minute for a
page to eject from a printer, but who's gonna wait 30 seconds for a page to
be processed, because the CF server is ripping through slabs of bloat code?
Sure, you say you could write the code generating engine to be tighter, but
haha, as you try to increase functionality, you will give in to the dark
side and see the practical necessity of including a bunch of libraries,
routines, or what-have-yous, just to be sure any code will run any time.
I don't see CF coding jobs going away any time soon. At least they won't be
going away to a PC...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Peters [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 6:25 AM
> To: Fusebox
> Subject: RE: Fwd: extreme programming
>
> I don't put much stock in AI (having researched in it a few years back),
> but I
> do use what I call meta-code (code that writes code) quite a lot. That's
> the
> whole idea behind tools like my Fuseminder, Adam Churvis' CommerceBlocks,
> and
> other efforts such as Steve is talking about.
>
> Let's face it, programmers write higher level code every year.
> Application
> programmers haven't written in assembler for quite a while now (with a few
>
> notable exceptions like Steve Gibson...). The key is creating great
> design
> tools that allow us to create great code. That last bit is the hard
> part--
> there's still enough art in programming to make "code robots" a very
> difficult
> prospect.
>
> - Jeff
>
> On 6 Apr 2001, at 14:40, Stephen Fernandez wrote:
>
> > why not cut out the programmers altogether...{redacted}
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
