Phillip,The same analogy can be made between Java and CF. By way of complexityCF does offer override methods (via the "super" class), but you're right it does not offer overload. Also, as far as comparing OO languages isn't it a fundamental difference that one language (Java, .NET) get compiled and another language (CF) does not? One language (CF) uses duck typing and the other language (Java, .NET(maybe?)) use strict typing? These features are the cornerstones to OO pattern designs. No offense butWhat do you mean "polymorphism (kinda)"... I've been doing some reading on that subject, and it seems that CF can do polymorphism. Where's the "kinda" part come into that? CF is not technically on the same level as Java or .NET or any true OO language.But CF can leverage any Java class, can't it? I'm not saying I do this, but just to play devil's advocate... Even Java and .NET are not purely OO. Languages like Smalltalk andSo it seems that "pure" OO isn't the requirement here (since .NET isn't pure OO), but "true" OO? What's the difference? what makes .NET's-kinda-sorta-definitely-not-pure-OO better (or more true) than CF's kinda-sorta-definitely-not-pure-OO. I'm still learning OO, so that's sorta what's driving my questions here. Also, as CF matures (i.e. scorpio, and presumably other later versions), isn't it likely that its implementation of OO design will also mature? Thanks for the response, :o) Chris |
_______________________________________________ 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/
