>>But I can't figure out how to pass the query from one module to
another.
You can also set your query in the request scope, ie : request.MyQuery
The request scope is visible in any module and sub modules.
~|
Want to reach the
You should really be doing this in a CFC. They're built for stuff like
this.
Thanks,
Eric Cobb
http://www.cfgears.com
ColdFusion - the most profitable "dead" language I've ever worked with.
Thane Sherrington wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is probably a stupid question, but my simple mind c
Set your query as caller.queryName is one way there are others.
You should be using a CFC for this and returning the query probably.
-Original Message-
From: Thane Sherrington [mailto:th...@computerconnectionltd.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 7:57 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: cfmodule
Nevermind.. I had a typo! It is attributes.
DOH!
> -Original Message-
> From: Chad Gray [mailto:cg...@careyweb.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 2:01 PM
> To: cf-talk
> Subject: cfmodule
>
>
> Inside of a CFM file that is called via CFModule. How do you scope the
> variables in t
-talk
Subject: Re: cfmodule and fusebox
The former. Attributes on the CFMODULE tag are passed to the custom
tag in the attributes scope, exactly the same as any other custom tag
invocation (CF_ prefix, CFIMPORT, CFMODULE name="...").
myTag.cfm:
Hello, #attributes.name#!
test.cfm:
The former. Attributes on the CFMODULE tag are passed to the custom
tag in the attributes scope, exactly the same as any other custom tag
invocation (CF_ prefix, CFIMPORT, CFMODULE name="...").
myTag.cfm:
Hello, #attributes.name#!
test.cfm:
output:
Hello Scott!
Hello world!
Hello barney!
Thanks for the help guys!
I am going to continue on with the cfmodule track and use the cfimport tag
to help me manage them.
I'm more familiar working with CFC's than cfmodules, which makes me *want*
to use CFCs for this, but I think the cfmodule tag is a better fit in the
end for me. At the ver
> I know you CAN, but whether you SHOULD is a different question.
I haven't seen any arguments why you shouldn't that go beyond "it doesn't
look/feel right".
> Whatever your personal opinion is, it's still a "weirdness"
> that has to be dealt with.
How is that a "weirdness"? There's an OUTPUT a
On 8/9/07, Dave Watts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can output text from within a CFC instead of (or in addition to)
> returning a value.
I know you CAN, but whether you SHOULD is a different question.
Whatever your personal opinion is, it's still a "weirdness" that has
to be dealt with.
I gen
> Mix in CFCs, and you suddenly have to deal with return variables
> rather than text output and no access to the variables scope, among
> other things.
You can output text from within a CFC instead of (or in addition to)
returning a value.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.c
> Questions on the custom-tag. Is there any performance
> difference between this setup and the cfmodule tag?
No, I don't think so. Any performance difference in finding a file one place
vs another will be insignificant.
> Would it irk you to see display HTML inside a CFC?
No, there's nothin
On 8/9/07, Jonathon Stierman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Questions on the custom-tag. Is there any performance difference between
> this setup and the cfmodule tag?
Nope.
> I'm passing very site-specific objects to
> my module, which makes me reluctant to have it stored in a global location
> a
e -
From: "Jonathon Stierman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk"
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 9:19 AM
Subject: RE: cfmodule use
> I've got a working version using now -- thankfully it was pretty
> easy. The whole start tag/end tag thing threw me a cu
uys would consider this better than the custom-tag solution?
Would it irk you to see display HTML inside a CFC?
Jonathon
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 10:47 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: cfmodule use
I'd say CFMODULE (I
I'd say CFMODULE (I used to use it for a similar task back around version 5)
should work for you, but you could also write a custom tag (with the attributes
you mentioned) or even a CFC
Aren't options greatnow you have to pick one ;-)
Cheers
Bryan Stevenson B.Comm.
VP & Director of E-Comme
CFMODULE is basically just another way to call a custom tag, with the
main differentiator being that the template name can be dynamic. I'd
recommend packaging your widget as a custom tag, and using it via the
CFIMPORT syntax. It's not really any different in terms of the code
you'll write, but th
Template specifies a template (a la CFINCLUDE), while name supplies a
tag name (a la CF_TAGNAME). In general, however I'd recommend using
CFIMPORT over CFMODULE.
cheers,
barneyb
On 10/23/06, jonese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok what are the major and minor reasons for using the template
> attr
Wow, do I feel stupid. I thought I went over this code with a fine-tooth comb,
but I guess not. Thanks for the help!
Chris
>>
>
>That should not have a closing slash.
>
>Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
>http://www.figleaf.com/
>
>Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authoriz
>
That should not have a closing slash.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized
instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta,
Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location.
Ah Ray Ah! :)
-Original Message-
From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sonntag, 19. Juni 2005 14:22
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: cfmodule
Heh, well if you have any more questions, let ke know. Remember, none
of my applications have bugs, and they work better than anyone
CTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 6:44 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: cfmodule
>
> Some gotchas you should be aware of:
>
> If you want "name" to be an attribute for your custom tag, you can't
> call it via cfmodule. What I typically do is use 2 attri
en <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 6:44 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: cfmodule
Some gotchas you should be aware of:
If you want "name" to be an attribute for your custom tag, you can't
call it via cfmodule. What I typically do is use 2 attributes, name
and well,
Some gotchas you should be aware of:
If you want "name" to be an attribute for your custom tag, you can't
call it via cfmodule. What I typically do is use 2 attributes, name
and well, something else, like thename or something. I then use
"thename" when calling the custom tag w/ cfmodule. Inside th
I'm not sure there's much more to it than what's in the docs:
http://livedocs.macromedia.com/coldfusion/6.1/htmldocs/reuseco5.htm
http://livedocs.macromedia.com/coldfusion/6.1/htmldocs/tags-pb4.htm
On 6/18/05, dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> anyone know of any good tuts on using this?
> I can
Which brings up a follow on thread:
What would you recommend as good reading on Architecture?
Jerry
Jerry Johnson
Web Developer
Dolan Media Company
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/02/04 02:53AM >>>
To write a good application, knowing ColdFusion is only 1% and most
people don't seem to understand that
And with a box hitting +250 req/sec on a custom tag based application on
a single CPU, I haven't. The whole performance situation depends on the
application, as well as the code in the custom tags.
If you experience serious performance problems due to IO traffic, or
heavy custom tag execution, peo
> Wow, we're in the midst of another list jihad and its not about
> FuseBox. Go figure.
I know, and somehow I stumbled right into it. Fortunately, it's an issue
which makes no difference to me. :)
> Anyway, he's probably using includes that don't contain a significant
> degree of CF logic, which
> CF 5 did release memory, while CF 4.0.1 didn't. I don't remember whether
> CF 4.5.1 did or not.
Thanks for the correction. I meant 4.0.1. We developed for and hosted on
ColdFusion 4.0.1 until some time after 5 was released. Then we moved most of
our stuff to 5. We are now migrating most of our s
>>I had some problems in ColdFusion 4.0, though I think
>>(besides not giving up memory) most were squared away by 4.1.
>>I don't think I deployed anything to (nor load tested on)
>>4.5. ColdFusion 5 seemed to be better about giving up
>>resources that weren't in use.
>>
>>
>
>CF 5 did rele
>And, frankly, I find if very difficult to believe that you've "never had a
>problem". I can see where the use of naming conventions and such would help
>prevent such problems. But to say you've never had a problem -- well, I
>assume you're making use of hyperbole.
Wow, we're in the midst of anoth
> > Prior to CFMX, I've run into all sorts of performance problems
> > with custom tags under load, not just ones that did recursion.
>
> Such as the aforementioned memory consumption or something
> else?
Poor response times.
> I had some problems in ColdFusion 4.0, though I think
> (besides
> Prior to CFMX, I've run into all sorts of performance problems with custom
> tags under load, not just ones that did recursion.
Such as the aforementioned memory consumption or something else? I had some
problems in ColdFusion 4.0, though I think (besides not giving up memory)
most were squared
> You'd have to use a hell of a lot custom tags for this to
> ever become an issue. As noted in previous messages, I make
> extensive use of custom tags and have yet to run into a
> performance problem caused by the use of custom tags in the
> manners described.
>
> I think this type of thinki
Depends on the efficiency of your construct. If you do it right, there are
many. That CFC would just be apart of a larger OO schema.
Phil
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Rouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 12:30 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMODULE vs
Would there be any advantage to doing this though?
--
Aaron Rouse
http://www.happyhacker.com/
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:30:30 -0600, Phillip Holmes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If running CFMX, you could always do this as well (with CFMODULE or
> CFINCLUDE):
>
>
>variables.iString = "#appl
This doesn't really turn
out to be a problem but occasionally it requires some awkward maneuvering.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 11:56 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMODULE vs. CFINCLUDE
I am going
> You are quite correct. However, using cfmodule and custom tags is
> potentially is server killer because it is EVERY call to the
> cfmodule/tag and not just the first call that grabs additional memory.
> So for every page call for every site visitor more memory is allocated
> for each cfmodule.
tring);
INCLUDE CFC contents:
Regards,
Phillip B. Holmes
-Original Message-
From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 10:56 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMODULE vs. CFINCLUDE
I am going to regret this, but...
We u
We are still on CF5 here, very few MX boxes on our network and never
had the luck to get a project onto one of them. We will be going to
MX though once Blackstone is out, sadly such is the way of life around
here. He did not go to Oracle 9i until 10g was out as well.
Unfortunately I doubt they w
Our footer normally is called with no parameters, it just has the
ability for a few to be sent to it. Offhand the only one I can think
of is the turning off of the navigation links that are normally
displayed in it.
--
Aaron Rouse
http://www.happyhacker.com/
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:56:23 -0500,
> ASP = Application Server Provider not Active Server Pages in this instance
Heh, I think we're all aware of that. But thanks for lookin' out -- or did
you just figure it out yourself?
Ben Rogers
http://www.c4.net
v.508.240.0051
f.508.240.0057
~~
ll be hosted in an ASP environment.
Ben Rogers
http://www.c4.net
v.508.240.0051
f.508.240.0057
> -Original Message-
> From: Micha Schopman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 10:40 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CFMODULE vs. CFINCLUDE
>
> Ben,
&
Ben Rogers wrote:
>>If I remember correctly, doesn't cfmodule create a whole new memory
>>block for every call, where as the cfinclude will only use the existing
>>memory space and be part of the normal page cache?
>>
>>
>
>Yes. In fact, that's at least part of the point. cfmodule -- and custo
I am going to regret this, but...
We use a similar approach, and for the same reasons.
But instead of the tag, we use . (No parameters are
passed to the close tags.)
Blah
Jerry
Jerry Johnson
Web Developer
Dolan Media Company
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/01/04 11:49AM
Our framework here uses the custom tag approach, not to imply it is
the best way to go, just what has been in use here for years. So a
typical page could be something like:
Blah
Now each tag may call other tags, for instance the header one calls a
tag that checks to see if logged in, che
Ben Rogers wrote:
>>In ASP based services, cfimport is useless because it demands a static
>>taglib attribute. That takes away all the glamour and glitter the tag
>>could have. At.. least.. for me ;)
>>
>>
>
>I agree that it's an unfortunate limitation, but I'm not sure how "ASP based
>service
Ben,
Imagine this situation. You have a CMS, and it has a shared directory
with templates for all customers. Each customer has also its own
directory with templates. These template function as overriding
templates instead of those shared templates (see them as virtual and
those of the customer as
> In ASP based services, cfimport is useless because it demands a static
> taglib attribute. That takes away all the glamour and glitter the tag
> could have. At.. least.. for me ;)
I agree that it's an unfortunate limitation, but I'm not sure how "ASP based
services" has any direct relevance? We
In ASP based services, cfimport is useless because it demands a static
taglib attribute. That takes away all the glamour and glitter the tag
could have. At.. least.. for me ;)
Micha Schopman
Software Engineer
Modern Media, Databankweg 12 M, 3821 AL Amersfoort
Tel 033-4535377, Fax 033-4535388
KvK
> If I remember correctly, doesn't cfmodule create a whole new memory
> block for every call, where as the cfinclude will only use the existing
> memory space and be part of the normal page cache?
Yes. In fact, that's at least part of the point. cfmodule -- and custom tags
in general -- provide en
>The loadtemplate.cfm is a "engine" which provides us with overriding
>schemes.
>
So basically you're using a cfmodule to cfinclude some files depending
on what is in the attributes of the tag.
>I personally would only use cfsavecontent for caching logic.
>Then you would have encapsulated those
Why would you want to do that :)
Currently this is how the source looks from our CMS pages based for the
CF5 version ..
The loadtemplate.cfm is a "engine" which provides us with overriding
schemes. I personally would only use cfsavecontent for caching logic.
Then you would have encapsulate
I've was thinking about this post last night - don't ask.
To give you a little background im mainly a solid Fuseboxer so issues
of layout have always been in the back of my head as it is something
FB accomodates for. But the one thing i love about the move from FB2
to FB3 was having the layout fil
Personally, the advantages of cfmodule outweigh those of cfinclude. The
performance hit of cfmodule is really low, and cfmodule provides you
with encapsulation. Variables defined within a template called by
cfmodule have no effect on the executed code outside that template
(unless you are using var
roperly but I almost never do
> (unless the tag is designed to work with a closing tag). So, yeah, this
> calling style can hurt a site, so use just to replace template="foo">
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Raymond Ca
Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 1:59 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: CFMODULE vs. CFINCLUDE
I'd agree with Simon, specifically the "not that it's a huge big
deal". I'll go out on a limb here and say if your site will not work
when
I'd agree with Simon, specifically the "not that it's a huge big
deal". I'll go out on a limb here and say if your site will not work
when using versus an include, then you have other
problems.
Yes, cf_foo (or cfmodule) is slower than cfinclue.
But don't worry about it.
Unless you are running Sp
Not that it's a huge deal, but don't forget that cfmodule also requires
a single file compilatation as opossed to two file compilations, as well ;)
~Simon
Simon Horwith
Chief Information Officer, AboutWeb
http://www.aboutweb.com
Member of Team Macromedia
Macromedia Certified Master Instructor
Ed
> If I remember correctly, doesn't cfmodule create a whole new memory
> block for every call, where as the cfinclude will only use the existing
> memory space and be part of the normal page cache?
You are correct, even in CFMX.
> Even if this isn't true for CFMX any more, personally, I'd probabl
Michael Dinowitz wrote:
>I'm rewriting Raymond's Lighthouse Bugtracker (not my idea) and one piece
>bought up an old question I had. Is there any performance difference between
>a CFMODULE acting as a layout wrapper or 2 CFINCLUDE templates with layout?
>In the first case, your code is:
>
>Display
CFModule encapsulates the layout nicer than 2 isolated CFINCLUDES...
You have a single layout.cfm which detects if #thistag.executionmode# is
"start" and shows the header or footer. It makes for an easier read if
the module is CF_TAGNAME'd..
Example... You have layout.cfm, so you can do this:
>There might be a better way of handling that... On CFMX I'd just say
>use sandboxes.
According to my SysAdmin, sandboxes aren't an option since we're running CFMX but not the Enterprise version. Is that correct?
Thanks!
~M
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscrib
There might be a better way of handling that... On CFMX I'd just say
use sandboxes. If you're still running CF5 this might work:
http://www.intrafoundation.com/ihtk/secFile/
Granted that's for Windows and I'm coming into the middle of the
conversation and don't know what os you're using. You can
>I'm not sure user-space code should be calling templates in the CFIDE
>directory ...
Thanks for the reply, Tom. Ultimately, what we're trying to do, per this article from ColdFusion Developer's Journal , is put in place a work-around to allow limited access to CFFILE and other restricted tags on
On Thursday 08 Jul 2004 01:42 am, M. Casey wrote:
>
> filefield="#thisField#" destination="#UploadPath#"
> nameconflict="makeunique">
I'm not sure user-space code should be calling templates in the CFIDE
directory ...
> Could not find the included template
> /CFIDE/Administrator/cffile_upload.c
wrap your current cfmodule call within a cfsavecontent block. then use that variable in cfhtmlhead.
-Adam
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 07:26 PM
> To: 'CF-Talk'
> Subject: Re: CFMODULE
One way to do it is to make cfhtmlhead work the way it should have been
originally defined... with an end tag. Here's a work around; copy this
code into a file called htmlhead.cfm in your customtags directory:
Then do this:
// js code here
// cfmodule code here
//etc
Steve Ne
x901
> -Original Message-
> From: Bryan Love [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 10:59 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CFMODULE vs CFINCLUDE
>
> cfinclude is WAY WAY WAY faster
>
> ALWAYS use includes if you can... Of course there will alwa
>I have a page where I want to conditionally include specific code blocks
>which exist in other pages.
>
>What is more efficient, CFMODULE or CFINCLUDE?
One thing that wasn't mentioned in some of the other replies I saw to this
thread was that CFMODULE and cfinclude are actually slightly differ
Thanks Matt and Bryan.
- Original Message -
From: "Frank Mamone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 1:54 PM
Subject: CFMODULE vs CFINCLUDE
> I have a page where I want to conditionally include specific code blocks
which exist in other
cfinclude
Matt Liotta
President & CEO
Montara Software, Inc.
http://www.montarasoftware.com/
888-408-0900 x901
> -Original Message-
> From: Frank Mamone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 10:55 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: CFMODULE vs CFINCLUDE
>
> I have a pag
cfinclude is WAY WAY WAY faster
ALWAYS use includes if you can... Of course there will always be
circumstances where you won't be able to (like recursive calls), but always
try.
+---+
Bryan Love
Macromedia Certified Professional
Internet Applicati
I see three solutions.
On is to use an absolute path which is fairly obvious.
Second is to pass the relative path into the custom tag. This might be
dynamically generated by the calling template.
Third is to use the var getBaseTemplatePath in the custom tag.
You'll have to do a bit of calculatio
> dir1 (sub directory of root)
> template1.cfm
> dir2 (sub directory of dir1)
> template2.cfm
> dir3 (sub directory of dir2)
> template3.cfm
> How does one place links (naviga
Not sure if I am reading your question correctly, but
There may be other solutions but absolute links always seem to cover every
base!
http://www.domain.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/template.cfm
OR
/dir1/dir2/dir3/template.cfm
Paul Giesenhagen
QuillDesign
> Hi all,
>
> My apologies in advance;
Cornillon, Matthieu wrote:
> Hi, everyone. The IT department in my company has told me that I can't put
> custom tags in the installation directory (something to do with
> multi-application environment, blah blah blah). In our installation, that
> is the only place where it searches for the tags
Technically custom tags are cfmodules, cept custom tags are global and
invoked by typing -- What you're doing is fine,
making a mapped directory and putting all of them inside and calling them
specifically by template (via cfmodule calls).
So, unless there's some reason why you wouldn't want
So.. wrap a #attributes.ButtonData# before the
and see what you're getting. If you're getting the same error,
you're overwriting something somewhere. If you are indeed getting
something, wrap an #ButtonData# below the and
see what's going on.
Not sure why you wouldn't just leave it in the
Shoot me :-)
My mistake... ignore the post
Benjamin
- Original Message -
From: "Benjamin Falloon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 7:47 AM
Subject: cfmodule issues
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know what's wrong with this code...
>
>
replacenocase(red_face, "schmuck","just human after all","all")
- Original Message -
From: "Bryan Stevenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: CFMODULE
aire Alliance Partner
www.allaire.com
- Original Message -
From: "Dave Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 4:32 PM
Subject: RE: CFMODULE and odd display behavior
> > Basically I've narrowe
e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Allaire Alliance Partner
www.allaire.com
- Original Message -
From: "Dave Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 4:32 PM
Subje
> Basically I've narrowed it down to an issue with CFMODULE
> because when I call the tags the good old fashioned way (from
> custom tags dir in cf server) then all is well.
Are you doing something like this:
or this:
If so, that calls the custom tag twice. Within the custom tag itself, y
gt;
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 3:57 PM
Subject: RE: CFMODULE and odd display behavior
> Could you post the code?
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, Nov
---
Allaire Alliance Partner
www.allaire.com
- Original Message -
From: "Won Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 4:02 PM
Subject: RE: CFMODULE and odd display behavior
> waht scopoe do you
Could you post the code?
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 7:02 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: CFMODULE and odd display behavior
Hey Folks,
OK I found this bug/glitch quite a while agoposted it to some
lists...never rea
waht scopoe do you set the formated string in?
do you have output twice?
Seeing the code would really help.
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 7:02 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: CFMODULE and odd display behavior
Hey Folks,
OK I
> I'm trying to call custom tags via a cfmodule tag. The tag is
> . I need to emulate the end tag .
> doesn't seem to trigger the executionmode variable
> inside the tag. Any suggestions.
Using CFMODULE with a closing CFMODULE tag has always executed the custom
tag twice, using the appropriat
> I guess "nor does it try to find CFML tag variables" means you also have
to
prefix attribute scope variables as well.
It's not very clear, is it?
I took it to mean ERROR returned by , CFFTP returned by
etc.
As opposed to FILE returned by , .
Of course, you're right that Attribute and Caller
> I though CF would automagicly try attributes.,cookies., etc.
> if you just
> gave it a variable name ?
There are some variable scopes which you have to explicitly state. Found
this in the Studio docs under "variables"
==
Order of ColdFusion variable look-up
Caller.variable, then reference it with just variable or variables.variable
in the calling template.
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Chiverton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 1:09 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: cfmodule oddness
Ah ha !
Cheers muchly :-)
I though CF
et another reason why one should
strive to properly scope one's variables...
|-Original Message-
|From: Thomas Chiverton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 4:09 AM
|To: CF-Talk
|Subject: RE: cfmodule oddness
|
|
|Ah ha !
|Cheers muchly :-)
|
|I though CF would
Ah ha !
Cheers muchly :-)
I though CF would automagicly try attributes.,cookies., etc. if you just
gave it a variable name ?
-Original Message-
From: Sandra Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 5:19 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: cfmodule oddness
Are you using
Are you using Attributes.x in the custom tag?
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Chiverton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 8:05 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: cfmodule oddness
I'm using
but get the error
The required parameter x was not provided.
From
d:\CFUSION\CustomT
I noticed that 4.5.1 does this. I fiddled with tags all over the place, and making sure that I
never called a module from withing CFOUTPUT tags, and that seems to have
cleared it up. I don't know specifically what did it, though. I'm just
letting you know that you're not crazy, as it is indeed
That is one COOL trick!
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/10/00 11:16PM >>>
Call it in the form:
something
-Original Message-
From: Jared Clinton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Subject: Cfmodule and execution mode end.
I'm wondering, if I use cfmodule instead of the shorthand customtag call ..
h
> What I found was that the CFModule tags I have that do not rely on a
> closing tag are being executed twice when I close the tag.
That's correct. You'll need to modify those tags so they only execute once.
You can do that by wrapping their contents within a CFIF:
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf
Jared,
Call it in the form:
something
Thanks,
David Sparkman
-Original Message-
From: Jared Clinton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 10:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Cfmodule and execution mode end.
Hi everyone,
I'm wondering, if I use cfmodule instea
Hello again,
Anybody who (briefly) wondered how to solve this problem you dont need to include the
template parameter in the second call...
so... the correct method is something
makes sense really doesn't it.
Jared Clinton.
Jared Clinton wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm wondering, if I use
What I found was that the CFModule tags I have that do not rely on a
closing tag are being executed twice when I close the tag.
At 10:06 AM 7/10/2000 -0400, you wrote:
> > Does CFMODULE have a closing tag so it works the same as CF_
> > tags that require a closing tag?
>
>Sure:
>
>
>...
>
>
>Dav
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
