RE: Mach II. Is it faster than Fusebox 3?

2003-08-20 Thread Haggerty, Mike
-Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 5:15 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Mach II. Is it faster than Fusebox 3? It would perhaps be instructive to find a reasonably sized FB3 app and then port it to FB4 and also convert

RE: Mach II. Is it faster than Fusebox 3?

2003-08-20 Thread info
. Is it faster than Fusebox 3? -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 5:15 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Mach II. Is it faster than Fusebox 3? It would perhaps be instructive to find a reasonably sized FB3 app and then port

RE: Mach II. Is it faster than Fusebox 3?

2003-08-19 Thread Mike Brunt
Nicholas, there are major differences between Mach II and Fusebox 3.0 which really make them incomparable. Here are some major differences. FB 30 is a framework for procedural programming style (as against an OO based style). Mach II is firmly rooted in an OO based style. Mach II uses

RE: Mach II. Is it faster than Fusebox 3?

2003-08-19 Thread Haggerty, Mike
speed enhancement within the framework. M -Original Message- From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 2:53 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Mach II. Is it faster than Fusebox 3? Nicholas, there are major differences between Mach II and Fusebox 3.0 which really

Re: Mach II. Is it faster than Fusebox 3?

2003-08-19 Thread Sean A Corfield
On Tuesday, Aug 19, 2003, at 12:06 US/Pacific, Haggerty, Mike wrote: With all due respect, I think the distinctive differences between FB and Mach II do not prevent one from making a judgment as to which framework is 'faster' for a given project. Well, the code would have to be completely