Has ANYBODY been able to get the site wide error handler templates to work in CFMX? Everytime I try to add one in the admin it tells me the path is wrong. I've tried every combination of path variations under the sun. I've also seen a thread in the mm forums where other people are having the same problem with no answer yet.
At 11:29 AM 26/07/02 -0300, you wrote: >Jesse and folks, we don't experience the same when dealing with >ASP/PHP/Perl and even JSP (afaik). Ok, this natural on any programming >language such as pure Java, C++ and so on, but I don't agree that such >behaviour is natural and expected in server-side scripts/languages such >as CF and ASP. Maybe MM could go forward on this and provide something >to perform the compilation faster or/and do it on the time we save a >cfm template. > >I have a friend that says the following about CFMX: it seens that CFMX >takes a long turn (gets more time and server resources) to get back to >the same place we can start (or just walk a little bit) with JPS. I >think this is a crap (CFML is easy, rapid and lovely) but the point is: >are the price for the "Java World" too high for merely mortals that just >want to do little things with CF (which is the perfect server-side >architeture for that)? > >Abraços! >Alex. > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: 26/07/2002 9:44 AM >To: CF-Talk >Subject: RE: It's official: CFMX is 10% faster than CF5 > > >/takes off tinfoil hat > >Uh, just to throw this in, compilation of code is something you deal >with almost any programming language. C, C++, Java, etc. It's a bit of a >movement of a literal line by line read, but overall, it does increase >the speed of the end result. > >Saying "that's Java" is incorrect. "That's Programming" would be more >apt. > >Jesse Noller >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Macromedia Server Development >Unix/Linux "special guy" > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 8:39 AM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: Re: It's official: CFMX is 10% faster than CF5 > > > > Yea it is a pain in the ass to have it compile the first time but > > thats java for you what do you expect ;) > > > > See java has its bad points. :P > > > > Bill Wheatley > > Senior Database Developer > > Macromedia Certified Advanced Coldfusion Developer > > EDIETS.COM > > 954.360.9022 X159 > > ICQ 417645 > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Alex Hubner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 4:31 PM > > Subject: It's official: CFMX is 10% faster than CF5 > > > > > > > CFMX Performance Brief: CFMX is "only" 10% faster than CF5 under > > > Win2k > > > boxes: > > > >http://www.macromedia.com/software/coldfusion/whitepapers/pdf/cfmx_perfo > > > rmance_brief.pdf > > > > > > Well, almost everybody knows it in it's day-by-day tests/usages... > > > > > > I disagree with the tests. CFMX is not 10% faster than CF5... It > > > looks that MM doesn't take in consideration the time (very long, > > > specially on templates that calls lots of includes, such as fusebox > > > ones), to the just-in-time compiler finish it's job (which takes > > > 100% of my CPU)... I've told once and I'm gonna say it again: it's a > > > > pain in the ass wait CFMX compiles my templates everytime I modify > > > it. In a production environment this is acceptable but in a > > > development environment is realy bad! It becames painless if you use > > > > 1Gb processors or faster but... Well, does anybody has the same > > > complain? > > > > > > []'s > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
