Classic, Hal. And Classy.

Angus, what do you think of Jeremy Allaire?  Do think he's one of the ones
who doesn't "get it," too?

H.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Howard Owens
Internet Operations Coordinator
InsideVC.com/Ventura County Star
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
AIM: GoCatGo1956
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hal Helms [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 3:36 PM
> To:   CF-Talk
> Subject:      RE: RE: re: Mach-II
> 
> Yeah, yeah, I've heard of this "Fusebox" framework. I've even used it
> once or twice. I just don't get what the big deal is, though. Sure it
> helps you separate logic and presentation, it helps teams work together,
> it provides encapsulation, etc, etc. But is that really sufficient
> grounds for liking something - that it helps people? What's next? Shall
> we adopt something simply because it works? Where would great
> corporations like Microsoft or Oracle be if they adopted that attitude?
> 
> You sound too much like that guy in CFDJ who sounds like freakin' Oprah
> with his talk about "empowering people" and "supporting developers".
> Give me something manlier than that! And as for documentation, which you
> note as a strength of Fusebox, well, all I can do is quote a greater man
> than I who said: "It was hard to write. It should be hard to
> understand."
> 
> Hal Helms
> "Java for CF Programmers" class 
> in Las Vegas, August 18-22
> www.halhelms.com
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Angus McFee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 5:09 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: RE: re: Mach-II
> 
> 
> Matt - 
>  
> Good to hear from a fellow fuseboxer!
>  
> No, this isn't a joke, this guy clearly has a problem with what fusebox
> has become and has made this other framework that clearly doesn't do
> most of what Fusebox is capable of. I don' t think him having helped
> make fusebox or having been in a few books makes a huge difference. My
> dog has been in a few books, that doesn't mean he don't hate cats.
>  
> But this really sounds like he is dissing fusebox. "Mach-II, though, is
> meant to be a pure OO framework. Fusebox and Mach-II have in common some
> good software engineering principles, but are very different things. I'm
> really referring to (a) backwards compatibility and (b) cross-language
> compatibility." 
>  
> These things aren't new and they don't do something you can't do with
> fusebox already. Fusebox already works in ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, JSP and
> Perl, and I have even seen a TCL port for the framework. In PHP, you can
> do all the object oriented programming you want, so I don't see why
> there would be a need for this "mach-ii" except to take away from
> fusebox.
>  
> This guy is just one of the ones who is never going to get what it is
> all about.
>  
> Angus McFee
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 4:37 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: Mach-II
> 
> This is a joke right?
> -Matt
> On Wednesday, July 30, 2003, at 04:08 PM, Angus McFee wrote:
> > Hal -
> >
> > I've heard from plenty of people looking for a way to beat up on 
> > Fusebox, but usually they have nothing to say when it comes to
> > building a better framework. This is the first time in a long time  
> > anyone has suggested an alternative approach, and I really don't see  
> > how any of this benefits developers. This mach-ii stuff looks like  
> > just another petty attack on Fusebox.
> >
> > It's pretty clear we see things differently when it comes to building 
> > Web applications. I don't know you, but I can tell you are a pretty
> > intelligent person, so you probably have some good reasons for why you
> 
> > don't like or hate fusebox.
> >
> > What I have to ask you is: do you use fusebox? Becuase there are 
> > plenty of people who are ready to attack it anytime and don't even
> > know ColdFusion, much less what a framework is. You will probably  
> > never be convinced about the benefits of fusebox, all I can do is  
> > disagree with you, and point out all the great things fusebox does for
> 
> > developers:
> >
> > * it separates business logic from presentation logic, making for more
> 
> > organized, efficent code
> > * it gives developers a common set of rules and methods to work from,
> > so that everyone can understand what the other people are doing on a  
> > project regardless of the size of a team
> > * it modularizes and encapsulates code, making it easier to reuse and
> 
> > thus to maintain
> > * it is self-documenting, containing a complete, inline XML standard  
> > for documenting your applications
> > * most importantly, there are thousands and thousands of fusebox  
> > developers out there, and more and more shops are choosing to use it  
> > every day. it is close to becoming a de-facto standard, which I doubt
> 
> > your mach-ii 'framework' will ever be able to match
> >
> > Angus McFee
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hal Helms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 2:16 PM
> > To: CF-Talk
> > Subject: RE: RE: re: Mach-II
> >
> > You're right, Dave. We're not looking to be able to incorporate 
> > Fusebox 3 (or 4) with Mach-II. We think that Fusebox is a great
> > framework for procedural programmers. (Please, God, don't let this  
> > degenerate into yet another pro/con Fusebox debate...)
> > Mach-II, though, is meant to be a pure OO framework. Fusebox and  
> > Mach-II have in common some good software engineering principles, but
> 
> > are very different things. I'm really referring to (a) backwards  
> > compatibility and (b) cross-language compatibility.
> > Hal Helms
> > "Java for CF Programmers" class
> > in Las Vegas, August 18-22
> > www.halhelms.com
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> 
> 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
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

Get the mailserver that powers this list at 
http://www.coolfusion.com

                                Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
                                

Reply via email to