So, I jumped in the car to drive to Wisconsin after a bunch of engaging emails to this thread... and get back online to find it has changed dramatically. I feel like I missed out. :)
I think this idea is great. Not only does it solve the bean naming convention issue, but it will allow us to modify a couple of other minor items to smooth application transitions to Reactor. With that being said (putting on my horns the last time), I can't help but to reflect on the several developers that have mentioned they noticed an unnatural aura surrounding the typing by bean name. While I am more than satisfied with the potential solution, I am wondering if it might not be promoting best practice. Thoughts? - Shannon -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sean Corfield Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 2:09 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Reactor For CF] getXyzRecord() - alternative proposal On 3/24/06, Jared Rypka-Hauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not sure I agree with you on that... my rationale for altering core > files is this: I suggested altering a core file too - just a different one that was more inline with the change being discussed. But I think you realized that after you posted? -- Sean A Corfield -- http://corfield.org/ Got frameworks? "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood -- Reactor for ColdFusion Mailing List -- [email protected] -- Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/reactor%40doughughes.net/ -- Reactor for ColdFusion Mailing List -- [email protected] -- Archives at http://www.mail-archive.com/reactor%40doughughes.net/
