On Monday 24 July 2006 15:02, Battershall, Jeff wrote:
Obviously, FDS would be a preferred way of integrating with CF if
available,
Dunno about that.
There is a difference betwen granular record editing, and service invocation -
FDS is better* for the former, remoting for the later.
--
Tom
PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom Chiverton
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 11:20 AM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Still Fuzzy about Flex 2.0 and CFCs
On Monday 24 July 2006 15:02, Battershall, Jeff wrote:
Obviously, FDS would be a preferred way of integrating with CF if
available
yeah and need CF 7.0.2no workie on CF 6Remoting works a treat. DKOn 7/24/06, Battershall, Jeff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:OK, gotcha, but I suppose the other issue is what version of AMF is
availble server-side.I'm getting the impression that AMF3 is necessaryboth on the client and server in
]
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 12:08 PM
Subject: RE: [flexcoders] Still Fuzzy about Flex 2.0 and CFCs
OK, gotcha, but I suppose the other issue is what version of AMF is
availble server-side. I'm getting the impression that AMF3 is necessary
both on the client and server
:20 PM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Still Fuzzy about Flex 2.0 and CFCs
Flex 2 can utilize AMF0 or AMF3; you just set the ObjectEncoding.
CF 7.0.2 can use AMF3; anything before only AMF0.
Flex 2 can talk to both old CF and new CF. Talking to the old sucks
from
in filesize
over the wire vs. AMF0, performance would be better too.
ColdFusion 7.0.2, 4 teh w1n!!!
- Original Message -
From: Battershall, Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 12:40 PM
Subject: RE: [flexcoders] Still Fuzzy about Flex 2.0 and CFCs
for this project.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of JesterXL
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 12:46 PM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Still Fuzzy about Flex 2.0 and CFCs
Ability to pass custom objects. I've
: [flexcoders] Still Fuzzy about Flex 2.0 and CFCs
Jessie,
I hear you on this - I've been dealing with the same sort of thing
myself, but I have a client who is looking for the low cost of entry
solution and CF7 upgrade and FDS would appear to be out of the question.
That's excellent that you can set
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of JesterXL
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 1:02 PM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Still Fuzzy about Flex 2.0 and CFCs
Just to be clear, you don't need FDS to use AMF3 ColdFusion's
ValueObjects, only CF 7.0.2.
I'm with you on price, though
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 1:05 PM
Subject: RE: [flexcoders] Still Fuzzy about Flex 2.0 and CFCs
Jessie,
Thanks for the clarification.
What I do not see in the Flex2 docs is the ability to use Remote object
without FDS. Would you have to write
: [flexcoders] Still Fuzzy about Flex 2.0 and CFCs
Just to be clear, you don't need FDS to use AMF3 ColdFusion's
ValueObjects, only CF 7.0.2.
I'm with you on price, though. They'll end up paying more in the end as
you
spend copious amounts of time writing ValueObject conversion code, and
debugging
-
From: Battershall, Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 1:05 PM
Subject: RE: [flexcoders] Still Fuzzy about Flex 2.0 and CFCs
Jessie,
Thanks for the clarification.
What I do not see in the Flex2 docs is the ability to use Remote object
without FDS
Jeff,You must have CF 7 and run the
7.0.2 updater for ColdFusion Flash remoting to work with Flex 2.You do use RemoteObject: mx:RemoteObject id=myService destination=ColdFusion source=cfcName
result=handleRemotingResult(event) showBusyCursor=true/Hit me back offlist and I will
13 matches
Mail list logo
