yeah, I've noticed that with Flex Apps and web 2.0 apps, the
frameworks become way more cumbersome than they're worth. In essence
you're controller shifts to a different location so you're not really
using the CF one anymore.
On 5/11/07, Eric Knipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kind of curious, for you guys who have done full-on Web 2.0 style
applications using CF as a back-end, do you still use a CF framework in that
scenario?
I'm not talking about a typical Mach-II app where later you bolt on a few
widgets. I mean the whole UI is in Javascript with no page refreshes, etc.
I'm working on a project like this right now and while we started out using
Mach-II on the back-end, we've ditched it since then because it became too
cumbersome to develop with. We had to write event handlers on the client
side and then turn around and do similar work on the back-end, and it just
didn't make sense. Now we drive everything through a couple of .cfm files
that invoke the appropriate views and/or business objects. It still feels a
little hackneyed to me though.
We're still using a lightweight proxy layer to avoid going directly into
business services on the back-end (the client app stuff talks to the proxy
beans, who in turn delegate to a services tier), which makes it easy to plug
in a framework for a non-AJAX version of the app if we want to, by the way.
Just curious what you guys think.
Eric
On 5/11/07, Ron Mast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Very informative Dave, thank you!
>
>
>
>
> Ron Mast
>
> Truth Hardware
>
> Webmaster
>
> 507-444-4693
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Shuck
> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 12:51 PM
> To: Dallas/Fort Worth ColdFusion User Group Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [DFW CFUG] can someone explain please, thanks!
>
>
>
>
> Ron, I was having this discussion the other day with a few developers
while at cf.Objective(). It has been interesting to watch the past few
years. At CFUnited 05, to me it felt like frameworks were still mostly done
by the advanced guys, but probably over half of the attendees at least
understood that they should probably better understand what was going on in
that area. I am over simplifying a bit, but last year it felt more like
everyone seemed to understand the value of them even if they didn't use
them. At cf.Objective() people look at you funny if you don't use them
(unless you are Simon Horwith, then people just look at you funny anyway).
Of course that is a more advanced group, but it is also the group that is
leading many of the tends and helping determine a lot of the "best
practices" which trickle throughout the community.
>
> There are certainly a lot of cases where frameworks are not necessary,
such as a small 3-4 page app. However, I always use Mach-II anyway for the
most part. My reasons are:
> a) I like the compartmentalization that it offers. Yes, I can build that
compartmentalization on my own, but why?
> b) Applications don't ever get smaller. Most applications that I have
worked on evolve or die. It is always a much more pleasant experience to go
back into an app that is well designed in a framework and add existing
funcionality.
> c) Standardization. This has really come to light as I have worked
closely with Aaron over the past couple of years on projects. When you use
a framework, you don't have to guess where to look for things. You
instinctively know. Whether you work by yourself, or whether you work as a
team, standards make things much more efficient in my opinion.
> d) Flexability. I can't stress enough how the concepts of event-driven
application models with filters, plugins, etc make changes easy. Things
that used to take weeks for us to implement in poorly architected legacy
applications can be implemented in hours. Yes of course you can create good
architecture on your own, but frameworks like Mach-II make it an obvious
direction to go.
> e) I am on Team Mach-II now. They make me say this stuff.
>
> ~Dave
>
>
> On 5/11/07, Ron Mast < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> What determines if an application needs to be programmed using a
framework?
>
>
>
> Is it true that we are past the spaghetti code era when programming in
basic coldfusion?
>
>
>
> I need to get this straight in my head, I'm confused at the moment.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
>
>
> Ron Mast
>
> Truth Hardware
>
> Webmaster
>
> 507-444-4693
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.instantspot.com/
> www.teksystems.com/
>
>
>
>
> --
> ~Dave Shuck
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://daveshuck.instantspot.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.instantspot.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.instantspot.com/
www.teksystems.com/
--
"In my head there is a mirror
When I've been bad, I've been wrong
Food for the saints that are quick to judge me
Hope for a Badman
This is the Badman's Song"
_______________________________________________
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.instantspot.com/
www.teksystems.com/
