I was a bit surprised about the "this" scope working in the CFM file as well. It did just create local variables that are different then the variables in the component object. So they make a kind of perverted sense if you think of the caller page as an object in it self. I wonder if they are different then "variables" scoped variables on the same page. I'll try that.
Thanks for the link, I now understand what the "scope" bug is about. I'll experiment with it to get an understanding. -------------- Ian Skinner Web Programmer BloodSource Sacramento, CA -----Original Message----- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 11:01 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: CFC Newbie Discussion. <cfobject name="testObj" component="test"> <cfdump var="#testObj#"> <cfset this.X = 12> <cfset this.Y = 24> This part confuses me...this scoped variables refer to the object they are contained within. It looks like you are setting them outside of a cfc. All that will do is create a structure called this, which contains x and y keys, its odd it works in the first place. I would think this should be a reserved word in MX. Hrm. Otherwise it's really personal preference on how to invoke your methods. It really depends on what they return, if anything. Like Michael I prefer createObject() for instantiating cfc though. Same code in cfml and cfscript, plus it's just less typing. The only big scope issue to me is the variables scope inside a cfc being available outside of it. This could be fixed in the upcoming release though...no way of knowing without joining the beta program though I guess. http://cfguru.daemon.com.au/archives/000067.html -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tuesday, June 10, 2003, 1:24:50 PM, you wrote: IS> I'm experimenting with my first CFC. I've written these simple example IS> files. <snip> IS> What I would like to discuss is the performance differences between the IS> various component methods I've tested here. IS> In the CFC code, the X and Y variables are in the "this" scope and the A and IS> B variables are in the default "variable" scope. What are the differences IS> between these practices other then the X and Y are available as properties IS> of an object (obj.X and obj.Y). IS> Then in the CFM code I accessed the component a couple different ways. I IS> first used a <cfobject> tag to "instantiate" an instance of the component as IS> a object variable "testObj". I then accessed the methods of that instance IS> with a <cfinvoke> on testObj and directly [testObj.method()]. Finally I IS> just accessed the methods of the component directly with <cfinvoke>. IS> I would like to discuss the pros and cons of these different practices and IS> when one might be better then another. Also, I remember reading about some IS> kind of scope bug involving CFC's, but since I wasn't really familiar with IS> CFC's at the time, I really didn't understand what I was reading. What IS> would this be about? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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
