You know, I'm probably biased, but you have to love the fact that almost
every code comparison shows CF having about half the lines .Net does. I like
.Net, a lot, and yes, we all know the # of lines isn't the most important
thing in the world, but it was funny how much this stood out, especially
The one thing that still sticks out to me (I went from ASP to CF almost
5 years ago) is just how much more difficult database interaction is
when you're not using CF.I also explicitly DON'T like the presentation
layer control that the display objects take away; that's fine if you're
a
development benefits,
IMHO, is huge. But these things are never discussed in comparisons with
other languages.
Steve
_
From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 9:17 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
You know, I'm probably biased
I have done some ASP coding -- mainly converting programs to CF.
Not only is a lot more work (in ASP) to put together a SQL query, there
are a lot of things to keep track of -- if you forget to close the
connection it can affect performance, etc,
Number of lines is not everything -- but a more
They also only talked about the general functionality of CF. There are so
many built in functions in CF that I think we all take for granted because
they've been in there so long. Things like manipulating lists, queries,
dates, display formatting. The list of CF's *real development benefits,
of a language is good thing, the stripping down of C/C++
into C# is all about that. However, in my opinion, they don't much CF
specialization.
TK
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 10:11 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges
.
Bernd VanSkiver
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
801.520.5957
-Original Message-
From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 8:26 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
What do you mean by shallow support? Honestly I almost never used Java in CF
since CF has
it
executes, could code compiled by CF server be used?
TK
-Original Message-
From: Bernd VanSkiver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 10:44 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
One thing nice about the .NET Framework is that if an application is
designed
From: Tom Kitta
Is there a way to use CF code outside of a server, stand
alone executable (without any server like software including
that mini server offered for presentation purposes)? In other
words can I compile a cf page and save it in cgi directory?
I am just curious since now CF
CFSTARTIgnore... just a subscription test msg.. CFEND
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
-Talk
Subject: RE: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
Is there a way to use CF code outside of a server, stand alone executable
(without any server like software including that mini server offered for
presentation purposes)? In other words can I compile a cf page and save it
in cgi directory? I am just
What do you mean by shallow support?
There's a good deal of Java that simply can't be used directly from within
CF. A lack of support for null values is a big reason. There's also a good
deal that requires workarounds or hacks. It's certainly possible to use a
lot of Java from within CF, but it
On Friday 07 May 2004 22:50 pm, Andrew Spear wrote:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url="">
l/coldfusiontoaspnet.asp
I guess MS will be buying CF now then... :-)
--
Tom Chiverton
Advanced ColdFusion Programmer
Tel: +44(0)1749 834997
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BlueFinger Limited
I gave this article a rating of 9 (outstanding). In my comment I told them
the article had me convinced... to stick with ColdFusion.
Steve Nelson
_
From: Andrew Spear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 5:51 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
I thought
I thought some of you might find this interesting.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.
asp?url="">
I read this quite a while ago when it first came out, and the biggest annoyance to me is that they seem to pick and choose which version of CF they refer to in order to best suit their
chance of getting repeat business and more importantly, more
referrals.
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 08, 2004 8:14 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
I thought some of you might find this interesting.
http
Second sentence of the article:
Is there any functionality missing in the target system that might require the purchase of third-party components?
--
---
Matt Robertson,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com
Shall we have a contest to see who can identify the most mistakes/inaccuracies/mis-representations in their comparison?:)
Ken
From: Andrew Spear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 5/7/2004 5:50 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
I thought
This article was there for a while now. I think it is based on CFMX 6.0. It
was there before the release of windows server 2003.
TK
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Spear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 5:51 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Microsoft acknowledges CF!
I thought
From: Andrew Spear
I thought some of you might find this interesting.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url="">
us/dnaspp/html/coldfusiontoaspnet.asp
Whoever wrote this has some strange knowledge of CF
They refer to LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO rather than LTE
They also completely
Very interesting..
I am some what surprised that CF is not bashed too bad in the article.
I find it sorta funny that some the CF examples use several line breaks to
show one tag. Thus making the CF code block seem almost as long as the asp
code block. But a surprisingly fair comparison. But, we
21 matches
Mail list logo
