I agree 100%. Tell them that you just want to use CF+XFB as a thin
abstraction layer on top of Java. The reason CF works so well (IMHO)
is that it's the ONLY language specifically designed to be a front
end for the web (without the burden of being object-oriented at the
same time). Why not let CF do the one thing it was designed for and
let Java focus on what it knows best?
Patrick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stacy Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 10:52 PM
> To: Fusebox
> Subject: RE: JSP vs CF
>
>
> That's EXACTLY how I see it !! Separate the business logic to the back
> end...Leave for Java. Meanwhile kick-ass in the front end with CF
> and FB+XFB
> !! (Hardly the correct way to phrase it when presenting the idea but I'm
> working on it)
>
> I've also been looking at incorporating XSL stylesheets into my FB
> designs...There's some great custom tags for the Java XSL transformers out
> there. :)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ross Keatinge [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 10:45 PM
> To: Fusebox
> Subject: Re: JSP vs CF
>
>
> I can understand your feelings about JSP and CF Stacy. Here is my
> story for
> what its worth. I am a programmer with quite a bit of CF
> experience although
> much of my other work has been in 'real' languages like C, VB (some would
> argue the definition of 'real' but ...) and others. I work with a page
> designer and last year we developed an ecommerce / storefront /
> catalog site
> in non-FB CF. I've always felt somewhat frustrated with CF
> because its not a
> strongly typed 'real' language.
>
> Our application needs lots of new features and is ready for a version 2
> rewrite. This time I really want to get business logic and
> content separated
> as much as possible. In the last few months I've made a big
> effort to learn
> Java because I somehow convinced myself that JSP / Servlets /
> JavaBeans were
> the way to go. I spent a lot of time playing with Struts
> (http://jakarta.apache.org/struts)and then Webwork
> (http://sourceforge.net/projects/webwork). Both of these are good
> Model View
> Controller frameworks for JSP being developed by some very smart people. I
> suggest that your Java people should be at least be looking at
> these if you
> can't convince them to go to CF. I found both had quite a steep learning
> curve and neither is quite released to version 1 yet. I too got
> excited when
> I found CachedRowSet and wrote a bean to use it but gave up over issues of
> jdbc drivers of varying quality and features.
>
> I then discovered Fusebox. With CF 5 ready to go it was just too good to
> move past. I couldn't see any compelling reason to switch to JSP
> and we are
> about to start redeveloping our app using XFB.
>
> I still like Java but I am not convinced about the JSP idea. My
> frustration
> with CF being 'just' a scripting language is still there to some
> extent so I
> am looking at doing some of my back end stuff in Java using
> either Java CFX
> tags or CFOBJECT when I want the features of a 'real' language. I really
> feel like I have the best of both worlds now.
>
> Cheers all
> Ross
>
> (A New Zealander in the USA. Been lurking here for a while.)
>
> --- Stacy Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > *sigh*
> >
> > Some peeps just don't get it. I'm 110% confident anything developed in
> > JSP can be replicated in CF and vice-versa (given the correct skillset
> > on the
> > developer). but MY GOD our place is OBSESSED with everything going
> > Java on
> > the front end...Projects are taking 10 times as long !!!
> [snip]
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
