I would agree. However, I have never done any OO programming at all, and
have found the concepts of CFOBJECTS not that hard to grasp. In context, I
relate it all to FuseBox terminology and that really helps to undertand it.
(methods=fuseactions, objects=circuits).
I am finding that using XFB (which I have only grown fond of in the last
couple weeks) and CFOBJECTS together is solving some of the problems I have
had with FuseBox for quite some time. The development of the new JaxCFUG
site is moving along at a great pace and I havent encountered a lot of the
nesting and code reuse problems that I did with the first gen of FuseBox.
Hal, what would it take to convince you to go ahead with the article?? Maybe
that exclusive copyrights and at least 75% in royalties from the movie?? :0)
Russ Johnson
Manager
Jacksonville ColdFusion Users Group
Home (904)695-9500
Mobile (904)465-1848
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Great thinkers have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." --Albert Einstein
-----Original Message-----
From: Hal Helms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 11:07 PM
To: Fusebox
Subject: RE: another nesting problem
******************************* Team Allaire *******************************
That's a very interesting idea. I had discussed this at great length with
Ralph Fiol and actually had plans to write an article with him for CFDJ. I
finally came to the conclusion that it was just adding too much complexity
to the development process by requiring that people have a full grasp of OO
techniques, which you really do need to have to work with CFObjects.
Hal Helms
Team Allaire
[ See www.halhelms.com <http://www.halhelms.com> for info on training
classes ]
-----Original Message-----
From: Russ Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 9:59 PM
To: Fusebox
Subject: RE: another nesting problem
Surely you cant think that the custom tag is an end all solution for code
reuse of complex functionality?? That would be absurd.
I am experimenting now with XFB and CFOBJECTS together in the same app. I am
looking to se what works best with both. During the first round I am trying
to allow FuseBox to be the overall application architecture and presentation
architecture and using CFOBJECTS to handle all of the "back-end" server
processing. So far it seems to be working together pretty well. Maybe a
marriage of the two, allowing FuseBox to control the app flow and
presentation layer stuff and CFOBJECTS to handle the back-end will be what I
have been looking for.
After all, there are many similarities in both of them anyways.
Russ Johnson
Manager
Jacksonville ColdFusion Users Group
Home (904)695-9500
Mobile (904)465-1848
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Great thinkers have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." --Albert Einstein
-----Original Message-----
From: Roger B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 6:28 AM
To: Fusebox
Subject: RE: another nesting problem
> ...but imagine the time you could save when you are developing apps if you
> could just call code that you have already written into some other circuit
> and not have to worry about which header file to include or "do I need to
> overwrite this variable that is being set in the other circuit?"!
Russ,
I already can, using a funky little technology called a "custom tag". [g]
--
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
