Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 6:29 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Sure it's fair. The programming world has an understanding of
what words
like inheritance mean. In fact they teach in CS courses. What
isn't fair
is MM
]]
Sent: 30 April 2002 13:20
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Err fine, then just don't use the feature I guess. To me, and to
most developers, it will be inheritance and they will enjoy the feature.
I can understand that you think the inheritance we have isn't perfect -
fine - tell us how we
Eh? Inheritance and Encapsulation (I think thats what meant :-) are in
CFC's AFAIK. what isn't is Polymorphism - and that also is on the
OOP list of features.
Thanks!
Neil Clark
Team Macromedia
http://www.macromedia.com/go/team
Announcing Macromedia MX!!
Or should I say : are a feature of CFC's sorry for the
confusion
Neil Clark
Team Macromedia
http://www.macromedia.com/go/team
Announcing Macromedia MX!!
http://www.macromedia.com/software/trial/.
__
Your ad could be
with Inheritance
-Original Message-
From: Neil Clark - =TMM= [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 30 April 2002 13:24
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Eh? Inheritance and Encapsulation (I think that's what meant :-) are in
CFC's AFAIK. what isn't is Polymorphism - and that also is on the
OOP
It all depends on what you/coders determine as true inheritance.
Sure CFC's provide a concept for inheritance in ColdFusion, but just
because it doesnt fit into a dictionaty concept, does mean it is isnt
inheritance : as Ray stated : to say that CFC's do not have inheritance
is just plain
end as they could but I got there on a
bike whilst they were driving a car.
Appoplogies for probably the worst analogy ever!
-Original Message-
From: Neil Clark - =TMM= [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 30 April 2002 13:41
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
It all depends on what you
Hee hee, my analogy was worse ... I sure didnt mean to say/think that
ColdFusion MX was an old banger!
I am not a VB man, but VB in my eyes is also inheritance.. no
question.
Neil Clark
Team Macromedia
http://www.macromedia.com/go/team
Announcing Macromedia MX!!
:) - it's you and me against the C++/Java boys (and girls) then!
-Original Message-
From: Neil Clark - =TMM= [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 30 April 2002 13:56
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Hee hee, my analogy was worse ... I sure didn't mean to say/think that
ColdFusion MX
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
I have to disagree, CFC's are a perfect
implementation of OOP . in
ColdFusion.
Remember that CFC's are geared toward the
ColdFusion developer, not
the
Java Developer, so I reckon they hit the nail on
the head - hard.
N
I don't think MM wants to have CF be like an OO language, thus the lack
of inheritance, interfaces, abstract classes.
Mind you, it sure would be nice. Sometimes I could just kill for some
OO-like functionality in CF.
- Original Message -
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date:
Subject: Re: I like CFMX
I don't think MM wants to have CF be like an OO language, thus the
lack
of inheritance, interfaces, abstract classes.
Mind you, it sure would be nice. Sometimes I could just kill for some
OO-like functionality in CF.
- Original Message -
From: Matt Liotta
Developer Resources
http://www.cfdev.com/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 4:37 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: I like CFMX
I don't think MM wants to have CF be like an OO language, thus the lack
of inheritance, interfaces
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Well there's the rub. I don't want CF to have anything OO like. If I
wanted OO, I would use JSP. What they are done with CFCs is offer
bastardized OO.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002
I have to disagree, CFC's are a perfect implementation of OOP . in
ColdFusion.
Remember that CFC's are geared toward the ColdFusion developer, not the
Java Developer, so I reckon they hit the nail on the head - hard.
N
Is it true interitance?
- Original Message -
From: Pete Freitag [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Monday, April 29, 2002 2:49 pm
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Actually CFMX CFC's do support inheritance.
And CFC's are pretty close to Object Oriented, missing just a few nice
features, I think
No, CFCs don't really support inheritance since they don't inherit
private methods and properties.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Pete Freitag [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 1:49 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Actually CFMX CFC's do support
Why do you think CFCs are a perfect implementation of OOP? Do you know
anything about OOP? Are you insane?
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Neil Clark - =TMM= [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 1:55 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
I have to disagree
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yahoo IM : morpheus
My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. - Yoda
-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 5:23 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
No, CFCs don't really support
Why do you think CFCs are a perfect implementation of OOP?
Do you know anything about OOP? Are you insane?
Matt, you sound very, well, angry today. Just relax ... take a deep breath
..
Seriously, I think that Neil was trying to say that, since CF isn't an OO
language, the limits of what you
What, do you mean - can it inherit any and all properties of a
superclass/cfc to give a formal mechanism for code reuse - then yes.
A CFC which 'extends' another CFC can inherits all of the variables and
all of the methods defined in the superclass/cfc.
Therefor true inheritance.
What CFC's do
Erm, CFC's do inherit such things - if you create a CFC with an extend
attribute then you can inherit all of the 'superclass' CFC's methods and
properties.
AFAIK.
Neil Clark
Team Macromedia
http://www.macromedia.com/go/team
Announcing Macromedia MX!!
--
Hi Matt,
I do indeed know a lot about OOP :-) (in fact I used to code for a
well known Sony Games Console - a long time ago of course) and if you
read my mail is saidfor ColdFusion
You seem a tad angry today? You are in danger of a Muffin.. :-p
Oh and yes I am in insane, very much
Message-
From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 2:31 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Then let's say they dont support a definition of inheritance then. CFC
can inherit, but w/ certain conditions. It's not fair to say they
_dont_
support
Check again, CFCs do not inherit private methods or properties. This is
in the documentation.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Neil Clark - =TMM= [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 2:51 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: RE: I like CFMX
What, do you mean - can
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 2:54 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Why do you think CFCs are a perfect implementation of OOP?
Do you know anything about OOP? Are you insane?
Matt, you sound very, well, angry
can't override any methods than it is safe to say that CFCs don't
support inheritance.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Neil Clark - =TMM= [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 3:04 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Hi Matt,
I do indeed know a lot about OOP
Apologies Matt :-) but a CFC can extend functionality of another
CFC...AFAIK.
I do agree with your statement about re-inventing the term though;
That said - there are a lot of people who still agree to disagree on
what OOPs definition actually is!
I am getting a serious delay with the list
Relax? I started drinking at about noon. I think if I get
any more relaxed, I am going to fall asleep.
Uh, ok. Maybe you're a hedonist after all, except you'll be too tired to
have any fun. There are better drugs for true hedonists than alcohol, I
understand.
There are a lot of ways to
Me too!
You know you are on a mailing list when...
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Neil Clark - =TMM= [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 3:45 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: RE: I like CFMX
Apologies Matt :-) but a CFC can extend functionality of another
CFC
matt,
correct if i am wrong (my java is a little rusty), but when inheriting
from a class in java, the subclass does not inherit private methods or
properties from the superclass (only protected and public).
mike chambers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta
That is the definition yep :-) but take this for example.. Say I
wanted to cookup a new 'object' of a ColdFusion Coder of course the
coder could be a human yes?
So we have 1 class - a superclass called human.cfc which looks like :
cfcomponent name=human
cffunction name=createhuman
In Java, a subclass does in fact inherit private methods and properties.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Mike Chambers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 3:59 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
matt,
correct if i am wrong (my java is a little rusty
have more respect for CFMX if CFCs weren't there.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 4:03 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Relax? I started drinking at about noon. I think if I get
any more relaxed, I am
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
That is the definition yep :-) but take this for example.. Say I
wanted to cookup a new 'object' of a ColdFusion Coder of course
the
coder could be a human yes?
So we have 1 class - a superclass called human.cfc which looks like
You're on the wrong list. We were talking about being a
hedonist on CFGURU. And I'm the one drinking...
Same conversation, different street corner. And drinking at noon doesn't
make you a hedonist, necessarily; it could make you a sot. Maybe you're
drinking your troubles away?
Anyway,
inherited...
we are talkig about the same thing aren't we?
mike chambers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 7:14 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
In Java, a subclass does in fact inherit private
I'm happy to continue playing with CF, as long as
it can be used to deliver solutions better, faster,
and cheaper than the competition.
Now if only we could get you to feel that way about Fusebox. Yeah, yeah, I
know. It'll be a cold day in.
:)
Ken
pseudo OO features and promising
more later?
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 4:38 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
You're on the wrong list. We were talking about being a
hedonist on CFGURU. And I'm the one
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 4:38 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
You're on the wrong list. We were talking about being a
hedonist on CFGURU. And I'm the one drinking...
Same conversation, different street corner. And drinking at noon doesn't
make you a hedonist
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
CTO, CFDEV.COM
ColdFusion Developer Resources
http://www.cfdev.com/
-Original Message-
From: Mike Chambers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 7:43 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
hmm, thats odd.
From Java In A NutShell 3rd ed.(published
: Monday, April 29, 2002 5:10 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Dave 100% spot on.
Talk is cheap, we are out here making things happen correcting nonsensical
OO code and making it work in CF. Bottom line CF Works, has is and will
continue to do so. We are all delivering applications that users
Finally, if CF is indeed better than those other platforms,
why is MM trying to morph CF into those other platforms by
introducing pseudo OO features and promising more later?
I mentioned earlier today that I though MM would introduce more OO features
in the future, I want to point out that
much to drink as I don't ever remember being flat out wrong
like this before.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Pete Freitag [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 5:25 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Yes, that's very odd, Matt were you thinking of protected
OO features to me.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Pete Freitag [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 5:38 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Finally, if CF is indeed better than those other platforms,
why is MM trying to morph CF into those other platforms
I'm happy to continue playing with CF, as long as
it can be used to deliver solutions better, faster,
and cheaper than the competition.
Now if only we could get you to feel that way about
Fusebox. Yeah, yeah, I know. It'll be a cold day in.
Well, it doesn't help me deliver
Good point, when Fusebox does something useful I'll use it too.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 6:12 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
I'm happy to continue playing with CF, as long as
it can be used
Good point, when Fusebox does something useful I'll use it too.
Uh-oh. Here we go. Better keep drinking.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
voice: (202) 797-5496
fax: (202) 797-5444
__
Structure your
Two thoughts on that perspective. First, since we all know
we are using the better platform wouldn't it be nice to get
others interested. I mean maybe Java developers looked at
CF before and didn't like it for whatever reason. However,
now that CFMX sits on top of J2EE they might take
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 9:12 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Good point, when Fusebox does something useful I'll use it too.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 6:12 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE
a methodology - ANY methodology - like
FuseBox, your code can be fairly elegant...
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 6:45 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Two thoughts on that perspective. First, since we all know
we
Good point, when Fusebox does something useful I'll use it too.
Uh-oh. Here we go. Better keep drinking.
No debate from here...trying to convert the unwashed masses on CF-Talk has
been proven futile. :)
Ken
__
This list
29, 2002 4:43 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
hmm, thats odd.
From Java In A NutShell 3rd ed.(published by Oreilly)
Page 106 : Access to members
If a member of a class is declared private, the member is never
accessible except within the class itself.
Page 107 : Access control
I get all that without Fusebox. What is unique about Fusebox besides the
bastardization of common programming terms?
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Tim Heald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 6:51 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Nested layouts
: Monday, April 29, 2002 7:07 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Good point, when Fusebox does something useful I'll use it too.
Uh-oh. Here we go. Better keep drinking.
No debate from here...trying to convert the unwashed masses on CF-Talk
has
been proven futile. :)
Ken
: Monday, April 29, 2002 10:11 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
That is one of the reasons I recently joined the CF-Talk list. For years
I have been seeing and hearing the craziest things from CFers, so I
thought I would see if this list is where the brainwashing happens.
-Matt
-Original
www.schoollink.net
-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 10:05 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
I get all that without Fusebox. What is unique about Fusebox besides the
bastardization of common programming terms?
-Matt
-Original
Yeah, I remember Hal mentioning something about workers in Fiji.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Ken Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 7:23 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
No, the real brainwashing happens over on the various Fusebox lists
out in CF should know, I'm game for that too.
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Tim Heald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 7:22 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Come on now that's a bit much isn't it? Why is something that takes
those
things that work
Are you sure, would you be able to see their existence using reflection?
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Green [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 7:15 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Page 107 : Access control and inheritance
Private fields
();
}
protected void method() {
super.method();
System.out.println(SubTester::method);
}
}
-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 8:05 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: I like CFMX
Are you sure, would you be able
61 matches
Mail list logo
