I have been coming across this issue more and more when dealing with
JavaScript and JSON which is ColdFusion changing true|false to YES|NO
values.
For example:-
cfset foo = true /
cfoutput#foo#/cfoutput = true
cfset foo = !foo /
cfoutput#foo#/cfoutput = NO
Now take this JSON
It's an annoying bug in Adobe CF, Railo works as expected
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1867728/how-can-i-prevent-serializejson-from-changing-yes-no-true-false-strings-to-boolea/6661460#6661460
z
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Steve Onnis st...@cfcentral.com.au wrote:
I have been coming
Also can anyone one recommend a way to do this now? I tried
JavaCast(“Boolean”, foo) but that didn’t work.
have you seen this?
http://www.coldfusionmuse.com/index.cfm/2010/2/5/Booleans.and.Coldfusion
Also, have you confirmed you have a true boolean? What I'm getting at
is the difference between
Wrong way
I want it to be true|false
-Original Message-
From: Zac Spitzer [mailto:zac.spit...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 4 August 2011 4:56 PM
To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [cfaussie] Converting boolean YES to true
It's an annoying bug in Adobe CF, Railo works as expected
And that is dealing with the structures itself. I am dealing with single
variables as per my example. No json conversion or anything.
I want !true to give me false, not NO
-Original Message-
From: Zac Spitzer [mailto:zac.spit...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 4 August 2011 4:56 PM
To:
Its odd that !true is NO but cant you just use if/else to accomplish this
till(if) Adobe fix this?
Paul
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Steve Onnis st...@cfcentral.com.au wrote:
And that is dealing with the structures itself. I am dealing with single
variables as per my example. No json
Yeah it can be fixed with if/else but should it be? We want to write less
code, not more...true ? or maybe it is YES J
From: Paul Kukiel [mailto:kuki...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 4 August 2011 5:13 PM
To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [cfaussie] Converting boolean YES to true
I agree Steve !true should be false but I'm not sure if there is an easier
way until ( if ) this ever gets addressed by Adobe.
Paul
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Steve Onnis st...@cfcentral.com.au wrote:
Yeah it can be fixed with if/else but should it be? We want to write
“less” code, not
TBH you would have to fix it yourself, I can't see Adobe fixing it soon as
it is likely a legacy issue, I would imagine if they change how it works to
the way we expect it should, any code using specifically the old behaviour
would error ... so they are probably stuck till they can agree on an
so, what's !YES ... is it NO?
is anything that can be construed as a YES (True, 1, etc) considered a
YES and therefore the opposite is NO?
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Chong kck...@gmail.com wrote:
TBH you would have to fix it yourself, I can't see Adobe fixing it soon as
it is likely
#(value ? true : false )#
There you go.
CF is dynamic, so true is YES is 1... if you want static values, use a
static language. There are pros and cons both ways.
Mark
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Barry Beattie barry.beat...@gmail.comwrote:
so, what's !YES ... is it NO?
is anything
heads up - this is CF9 ( Railo 3.3 code)
On 4 August 2011 15:40, Mark Mandel mark.man...@gmail.com wrote:
#(value ? true : false )#
There you go.
CF is dynamic, so true is YES is 1... if you want static values, use a
static language. There are pros and cons both ways.
Mark
--
*AJ
They can leave it as it is. If they add a toBoolean() function then the
existing functionality can remain but we can use this function to actually
give a proper Boolean value
From: Chong [mailto:kck...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 4 August 2011 5:31 PM
To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com
Subject:
The issue here is not one of static vs. dynamic languages. JavaScript is
dynamic but doesn't have this difficulty with booleans that Adobe CF has.
The problem is due to two characteristics of Adobe CFML:
1. Boolean is not a true primitive type.
2. Boolean operators return the string YES
Nkosi, I think you may be on a bit of a (needless) wild goose chase. Going
back to your first note said;
... we cannot figure out how we can get our CF sites to run without
requiring WEB-INF [and CFIDE] in the root of our sites. This basically means
our CF Admin is browsable via our web site
Steve, you've mentioned 3 really unrelated subjects in this thread: hashing
and encoding, and others have mentioned encrypting. So which is it you
really need?
In your last note, you say I am passing some JSON strings around which i
want to just encode and decode elsewhere. Perhaps if you explain
No, Gavin. As I said in the note below (On Aug 2, 10:49 pm),
Thanks, Gavin. I'd want to fix anything I could, but I don't see
what's failing. Can you be more specific, please?
The Adobe link works, right?
http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/exchange/index.cfm?event=extensionDetailextid=
1000713
I just don't want it human readable.
Like i have foo.cfm?{var:val} and i just want to encrypt the query
string and decrypt it in the foo.cfm page
-Original Message-
From: charlie arehart [mailto:charlie_li...@carehart.org]
Sent: Thursday, 4 August 2011 10:31 PM
To:
Well, are you sure that's really all you mean? Because you can make it
non-human readable by encoding it, but someone can decode it. So the
question is, in saying non-human readable, do you mean merely not
obviously so (encoding), or not possibly so (encrypting, though of course
even that's not
Well,
That's not a hash, that's encryption.
Im not sure how you do that in Javascript without a key, and they key would
need to be in the javascript code.
I guess you could ajax call back to the server to get the key to encrypt the
paramaters, but a sniffer would see the key.
If you don't care
Charlie
I just mean not obvious as you say. It is for an admin system so from a
client perspective it is more of a perceived security thing more than
anything else.
I don't like passing things around the URL as it is so this is just to make
it more difficult to tamper with
-Original
21 matches
Mail list logo
