Neil Clark - =TMM= wrote: > CFObjects and CFC's both mould themselves on OOP - CFC's > are a closer match than CFObjects.
Agreed. But that's my point... J.J. and company have effectively integrated CFObjects into the app server. That doesn't have a negative impact on FB on a technical level... it's all good, as far as I'm concerned. But on a conceptual level, "selling" FB just got substantially harder, 'cause the average, CFC-capable developer will find it easier than ever to get Fusebox-like benefits from non-Fusebox'd code. Fortunately, I'm not that worried about selling FB. I like it, and encourage others to try it, but it's usefulness to me doesn't hinge on other folks embracing it. -- Roger ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [email protected] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrFMa.bV0Kx9 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
