> > If you're using CFMX, though, you might not even > > bother with it. Its popularity is largely based > > on the fact that it's the only way to write > > user-defined functions in CF 5. You can do a lot > > more (and do it better) with the CFFUNCTION tag > > in CFMX. > > Really Dave ? I would say programmers coming from > php,c,java,javascript would find <cfscript preferable > in some a lot of cases. I do. Especially for loops in > loops etc...
I might prefer the syntax of CFSCRIPT too, but that's easily outweighed by the ability in CFFUNCTION to validate argument datatypes and requirements with the TYPE and REQUIRED attributes of CFARGUMENT, and specify the return datatype of the function using the RETURNTYPE attribute of CFFUNCTION. To me, both of those things - and especially the first - make up for any syntax preferences I might have for C-style code. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
