Shoot, I find it hard to read if you have a ton of arugments to pass in. Oh well. thanks for feedback.
gabe -----Original Message----- From: Sean Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 4:48 PM To: Fusebox Subject: Re: Instance scope On 6/18/05, gabriel l smallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey guys, this just sparked a thought. Does the fusebox parser support > something like this for passing in arguments: No. And I don't see a need for it. You can specify named arguments directly if you need to: <invoke class="member" methodcall="get(memberid=url.memberid)" returnVariable="member" /> BTW, in your code, you are closing the <invoke> verb before the <argument> verb anyway which is illegal syntax: > <invoke class="member" methodcall="get()" > returnVariable="member" /> > <argument name="memberid" value="#url.memberid#"> </invoke> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:12:6770 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/12 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:12 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.12 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
