> The term, OO, is not merely an imprimatur that marketing can annoint a > product with if it is to mean anything at all. We should be able to > expect that "this" is a private scope, that CFCs would have overloadable > methods, overloadable constructors, etc. > I disagree with adding overloadable methods as CF is a typless language and really should have no use for them. And while I feel that CFCs have given CFMX enough functionality to be considered OO; I would have liked interfaces, abstract CFCs, and static variables.
-Matt ______________________________________________________________________ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com 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
