> Shameless is right... you list yourself as lead developer for 
> C4.net... which is an ASP site.

So? :) Actually, (as you can tell) that is a very old site. All our
current development is in ColdFusion. You can see the new (ColdFusion)
prototype at the following location, if you're interested:

http://dev.c4.net

If you want ColdFusion credentials, well, my work on the Teva Web site
several years back was documented on the Allaire Web site. Not sure
where to find it now, though I probably have copy of saved somewhere.

Better yet, why don't you take a look at the CF-Talk archives where I
can be found proclaiming the virtues of Fusebox on December of 2000: :)

http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg35685.html

> Then your review CFMX as compared to current CF with Fusebox. 
> Pardon the initial conclusion... but that seems somewhat to be an 
> agitant rather than a former supporter of fusebox. Do you have any 
> sites that you built with fusebox?  ... 

I think the only one left is the Grand Canyon Association bookstore,
though I can't say for certain as I haven't been a part of that site in
quite some time.

http://www.grandcanyon.org/bookstore/

As I said, most of my sites use my own architecture. If you have a look
at some of my more recent sites, you will probably notice that they all
get switched through an Index.cfm. Instead of a FuseAction variable, I
use one called Method. I changed the variable name (back when I planned
to "open up" my framework) so as to avoid confusion with Fusebox.

Have a look at my current project for an example:

http://temp.capecodchambers.com/

> (Reading your article... Yes page 3)... So you do program in a 
> variation of fusebox... is this asp, or ColdFusion?

ColdFusion. It is my understanding that ASP cannot (practically) be
coded in a fusebox because the it doesn't support dynamic includes.
However, my ASP skills are not very good and I haven't played with .Net
yet. Maybe this has changed.

> It appears you have done 
> ColdFusion. Your article is inept... have you built an entire site 
> with MX yet? Have you replaced all the fusebox architecture with 
> your pseudo MX replacement features yet?

Heh, heh, heh. As I said in the article, I took one of my existing sites
and recoded it using CFCs. It was the only way for me to learn. I tried
working CFCs into my framework, but I found that they solved so many of
the same problems that my framework solved in a more elegant manner that
I just gave up and started over from scratch, which is my main point. :)

> ....If you "decentralize" the switch file you will lose one of the 
> greatest benefits of Fusebox!

And one of the biggest problems. The fact that everything has to get
handled by the coder seems to me to be a work around. I believe it was a
viable work around in earlier ColdFusions (I still code this way) but
what I've learned of CFCs so far suggests that there is a more elegant
solution built right into the CFML engine and the language itself.

> ...All that to say this... CFC's do not eliminate the benefits of 
> FuseBox. CFC's add features and methods that FuseBox can take 
> advantage of now. These extensions lend themself to interoperable 
> services that reach beyond current networking capabilities. 
> FuseBox is here... CFC's are here... one will not replace the 
> other... it is just a question of how to make the mix work 
> effectively!

You certainly will be able to incorporate CFCs into Fusebox
applications. That was not my point. And this is no doubt what will
happen in most cases. My point, however, is that I think I (and probably
a good number of Fuseboxers) will find that we no longer need fusebox in
the same way we used to.

Benjamin S. Rogers
http://www.c4.net/
v.508.240.0051
f.508.240.0057

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/22/02 05:47PM >>>
> Don't you understand... that if you don't want to move the
> standard to MX then you are dedicating resources to develop an 
> alternate way of doing what MX is ready to do... hmmm... maybe I 
> am wrong... but it seems like that is the case.

<plug type="Shameless">

That was actually one of the main points of an article I wrote just the
other day. You may find my experiences interesting.

http://www.fulgen.com/content/developerscorner1.cfm 

</plug>

Benjamin S. Rogers
http://www.c4.net/ 
v.508.240.0051
f.508.240.0057

==^================================================================
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
==^================================================================


Reply via email to