> This looks very cool.
thank you.
> Do you have a sense of how CFML tags might be supported in the future?
> Or would the ability to call CFCs mean that you'd lean more toward CFC
> wrappers for certain tags (I'm thinking, for example, of the approach
> Adobe uses in CF9 to support mail and query inside<cfscript> with CFC
> wrappers)?
Once CFC calling is done (which isn't far away) then yes, that is indeed
a "get-out-of-jail-free-card" way of doing it. Personally, i don't
like it, as it is a huge overhead to up through the stack and back down
it again. So a CFC is a bad-hack IMHO. That hack has been available
since CFC's were introduced, so to still be doing that in this day'n'age
just feels wrong.
I've started to push the common tags out to CFML functions already, so
we have QueryRun() etc that are there. I have a rough prototype of a
generic tag-runner function, but to be honest, its somewhat clunky and I
am not happy with it.
runTag( "cfquery", {attributes} );
I feel it should be "cleaner" than that.
> And finally a design question: did you consider the syntax<cfscript
> language="javascript"> instead of adding a new tag? I'd be interested
> to hear your thinking behind that.
oh that was easy - so i can develop this as a separate plugin with out
touching any of the existing OpenBD code. Once we get to a stage where
we feel this is ready, then I can simply override the <CFSCRIPT> code
and look for the "lanaguge=''" attribute and switch accordingly.
so for the moment, think of it merely as a shortcut to the CFSCRIPT tag,
which is logically where it should sit, i think everyone can agree there.
--
aw2.0
http://www.aw20.co.uk/
--
Open BlueDragon Public Mailing List
http://www.openbluedragon.org/ http://twitter.com/OpenBlueDragon
mailing list - http://groups.google.com/group/openbd?hl=en
!! save a network - please trim replies before posting !!
