This is a brand-new application, so there's no problem with consistency as long as we are consistent =).
There's a varying level of CF expertise on this project so I think it might be easier if I stick to as many "well known" data types as possible. Thanks for the input Dave.
Eric
On 10/13/06, Dave Shuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think the only argument against it would be consistency. If 85% of your TOs were structs, and the other 15% were query results, it might lead to confusion down the line. Other than that, I don't see any issue.
~Dave
On 10/13/06, Eric Knipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:Just wondering, what do you guys think about using the result of a <cfquery> as a transfer object, rather than creating a struct?
_______________________________________________
Reply to DFWCFUG:
[email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list
List Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/
http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/
DFWCFUG Sponsors:
www.HostMySite.com
www.teksystems.com/
--
~Dave Shuck
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.daveshuck.com
_______________________________________________
Reply to DFWCFUG:
[email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list
List Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/
http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/
DFWCFUG Sponsors:
www.HostMySite.com
www.teksystems.com/
_______________________________________________ Reply to DFWCFUG: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists1.safesecureweb.com/mailman/listinfo/list List Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40list.dfwcfug.org/ http://www.mail-archive.com/list%40dfwcfug.org/ DFWCFUG Sponsors: www.HostMySite.com www.teksystems.com/
