Agreed, Matthew. Im looking through the documentation for the exact text to back up my statement. I originally got the information from a presentation at the CFUN02 conference this last weekend.
Jeremy -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Morvant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 11:11 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: CFMX - Did you know... Shouldn't we all WANT to scope our variables, regardless of what is allowed or not allowed. Why would we want to use an upgraded product without upgrading our code to go with it. I am as lazy as the next person when it comes to not explicitly scoping locals, but all the other scopes should be explicitly defined no matter what the server will let us do. Just my .02 Matthew -----Original Message----- From: Billy Cravens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 10:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: CFMX - Did you know... I don't think this is true - there's still an implied scooping hierarchy (quoting from MX documentation): If you use a variable name without a scope prefix, ColdFusion checks the scopes in the following order to find the variable: Arguments Variables (local scope) CGI URL Form Cookie Client --- Billy Cravens Web and Software Consulting www.Architechx.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jeff Mayfield Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 2:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CFMX - Did you know... At 6/19/2002 04:15 PM, you wrote: >3) Scoping of all variables is REQUIRED in CFMX. Only the variables scope >does not require an explicit named scope. > >For example, #CFID# will NOT find #Client.CFID#. You can also no longer >leave off the scope for form or URL variables and expect CF to locate the >variable. It will search the variables scope and then throw an error if the >variable name doesnt exist in the variables scope. You now must write >#form.thisvar# and #url.thatvar# Are you sure there's not an administrative setting that can override this behavior? Based on how I write code, and what I've seen in every single project I've inherited from other companies - there's going to be a lot of broken apps. How does Macromedia claim backward compatibility? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - This email server is running an evaluation copy of the MailShield anti- spam software. Please contact your email administrator if you have any questions about this message. MailShield product info: www.mailshield.com ----------------------------------------------- To post, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe / unsubscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email server is running an evaluation copy of the MailShield anti- spam software. Please contact your email administrator if you have any questions about this message. MailShield product info: www.mailshield.com ----------------------------------------------- To post, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe / unsubscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email server is running an evaluation copy of the MailShield anti- spam software. Please contact your email administrator if you have any questions about this message. MailShield product info: www.mailshield.com ----------------------------------------------- To post, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe / unsubscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email server is running an evaluation copy of the MailShield anti- spam software. Please contact your email administrator if you have any questions about this message. MailShield product info: www.mailshield.com ----------------------------------------------- To post, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe / unsubscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org
