This is how Java handles it, so personally, I think it is neither a bug nor a feature, just we have to work with the way it is handled on the new platform. However, ISTR that Macr is going to address this in the next release.
In the previous conversation, it was recommened to use Compare() or CompareNoCase() to get the desired result: <cfif Compare(var1,var2) neq 0>not equal</cfif> Tim P. -----Original Message----- From: Alex Hubner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 1:31 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Variable names in CFMX Sorry, I didn't saw it. It's a bug or a "feature"? :o) I found it when dealing with dynamic variables name such as 1a,1b,1c,1d,2a,2b,2c,3d and so forth. I think this is a very common thing isn't? []'s Alex > ---------- Mensagem original ----------- > > De : "Christopher Olive" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Para : CF-Talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc : > Data : Sun, 25 Aug 2002 01:26:47 -0400 > Assunto : RE: Variable names in CFMX > > i believe that this came up in a previous thread. as a reprise, the "D" > denotes "decimal notation", and as such, is equal to 55 (in which th e > decimal (as opposed to hex/octal) notation) is the default. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alex Hubner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 1:00 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Variable names in CFMX > > > Hi folks, this is little bit offtopic but it's very weird: > > <CFSET var1="55"> > <CFSET var2="55D"> > <CFIF var1 EQ var2>Equal!<CFELSE>Different</CFIF> > > The CFMX outputs "Equal"... Does anybody have a clue about what migh t > it be? This is syntax problem when converting it to Java? I didn't > see any mention to that in the CFMX docs. > > By the way: CFMX still "typeless"? And what about when the CFMX code > is converted to Java code? How the JIT decides which data type a > variable has? > > Abraços! > Alex > > > ---------- Mensagem original ----------- > > > > De : "Jim McAtee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Para : CF-Talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc : > > Data : Sat, 24 Aug 2002 21:25:48 -0600 > > Assunto : Re: Variable names in CFMX > > > > Funny you should mention that. About a month ago I was trying to de > vise a > > naming convention for CF variables used as constants in a particul ar > > application. I don't bother using variable prefixes in my applica ti > ons, but > > was hoping to use a leading underscore to denote a "constant". Of c > ourse, > > in CF5 it was invalid. > > > > Jim > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Michael Dinowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2002 9:08 PM > > Subject: Re: Variable names in CFMX > > > > > > > I agree that there's no meaning for them and it'll be even more co > nfusing > > to people coming from other languages such as perl. Personally, I' m > never > > going to use them. > > > Even in another arcane naming convention. <g> > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, August 24, 2002, at 07:22 , Michael Dinowitz wrot e: > > > > > <CFSET _new=1> > > > > > <CFSET $new=2> > > > > > <CFOUTPUT>#_new# #$new#</CFOUTPUT> > > > > > > > > Maybe it's in preparation for the VAX port? ;) > > > > > > > > I can think of no value whatsoever for allowing either of thes e. > They do > > > > not contribute to readability and there's every chance that so me > bright > > > > spark will come along and 'invent' some cryptic meaning for th em > in yet > > > > another arcane naming convention :( > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.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
