Correct; I have one that I am working on now in my spare time. Although, it is functional enough for me to use at this point, so I do all my CFML development in Eclipse. See my earlier message for what is does and what I hope it to do in the future.
-Matt On Wednesday, August 27, 2003, at 02:52 PM, Calvin Ward wrote: > Matt, > > Are you talking about doing an Eclipse plug in for CFML development? > > - Calvin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 2:43 PM > Subject: Re: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? > > >> I agree as well. I have been working on an Eclipse plug-in in my spare >> time that does all of what you mention. Right now, all I have is >> syntax >> highlighting and J2EE deployment management. Hoping to add something >> like intellisense and syntax debugging in the future, but as always, >> side projects are slow going. >> >> -Matt >> >> On Wednesday, August 27, 2003, at 02:23 PM, Tony Weeg wrote: >> >>> I couldn't have said it better myself. >>> >>> CFS with some VBStudio like tools, intellisense, breakpoints, >>> etc....would just plain rock!!!! >>> >>> tony weeg >>> sr. web applications architect >>> navtrak, inc. >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> www.navtrak.net >>> office 410.548.2337 >>> fax 410.860.2337 >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Calvin Ward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 2:21 PM >>> To: CF-Talk >>> Subject: Re: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? >>> >>> >>> I would have to disagree. >>> >>> For example, a language centric tool could leverage strong server >>> debug >>> capabilities. >>> >>> Wouldn't you like to be able to open a page within the IDE, go >>> through >>> your application, have debug output in another panel of your IDE for >>> that page and it's include files, be able to set break points, and >>> trace >>> variable values to reduce <cfabort> debugging needs, and come across >>> an >>> error, click on the error within your IDE, have it open the offending >>> .cfm page in your IDE, and highlight the error. >>> >>> Wouldn't that be powerful? And doesn't that sound familiar (except >>> that >>> it works so clunkily and problematically in CFS...)? >>> >>> Divorcing the language from the tool does the developer a disservice, >>> you can write CFML in notepad, but why should you? CFS is far >>> superior >>> with it's help/reference system alone (language specific), not to >>> mention the color coding (language specific), and the toolbar >>> (language >>> specific), and so forth. >>> >>> What we need is a ColdFusion centric IDE, that also strongly supports >>> the rest of the stuff we'll be reasonably expected to work within >>> (xml, >>> html, css, javascript). >>> >>> If it can be used for other things, great. But let's take the tools >>> to >>> another level, I can't understand why after 4 years, CFS and DWMX is >>> still the best we can have to support CFML development specifically. >>> >>> - Calvin >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Jerry Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 2:01 PM >>> Subject: Re: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? >>> >>> >>>> I see it from exactly the opposite point of view. >>>> >>>> I am forever thankful Allaire (and Macromedia) have divorced the >>>> language >>> from the development environment. >>>> >>>> I'm glad I can use whatever editor I like to manipluate the source. >>>> I've >>> used textpad, CF Studio, Dreamweaver, Editplus, Ultradev, grep. >>>> >>>> I like (and use) CF Studio. It is my current favorite. But as with >>>> any >>> editor, it will take the back seat at some point to my new favorite >>> (whatever it is going to be). >>>> >>>> I also like that Studio isn't CF centric. I use it to edit perl, >>>> php, >>> vbscript, bat files, cshell scripts, jsp, hts. >>>> >>>> It still isn't as good as Brief or the Turbo Pascal 5.0 editor (for >>>> what >>> they did at the time). But it is the best I have at the moment. And I >>> would keep it for the extended search and replace even if nothing >>> else >>> worked. >>>> >>>> Just my opinion >>>> Jerry Johnson >>>> >>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/27/03 01:51PM >>> >>>> You make some valid points. In fact your points support my >>>> arguments. >>> >>>> At >>> the end of the day, we are still left with out a "ColdFusion >>> Centered" >>> IDE. We still have to make do with what's available. No doubt >>> Dreamweaver leverages ColdFusion MX better than every thing else on >>> the >>> market but its still a 20% ColdFusion / 80% every thing else tool. >>> We >>> should have to do all this jumping around. Some of use using jedit, >>> others you dreamweaver, some in HomeSite, and proably most still in >>> Studio. >>>> >>>> As far as the survey. I would like to see the survey results. I >>>> want >>> >>>> to >>> know how many serious CF developers have completely adopted. I want >>> to >>> see bar charts and pie graphs and stuff. Are they giving us what we >>> asked for? >>>> >>>> Heck, they can just take the "application" panel in Dreamweaver, >>>> drop >>>> it >>> into Studio then Update the Studio interface to be consistant with >>> other >>> products in the family and tah dah.. there you have it. >>>> >>>> My point is we need a ColdFusion Centered IDE; one that MACR should >>>> be >>> proud of. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, Aug 27, 2003, at 03:03 US/Pacific, dwayne wrote: >>>>>> About 9 û 11 months ago I spent about 10 minutes of my time >>>>>> responding to a macromediaÆs ColdFusion survey and I have yet to >>>>>> see the results. >>>>> >>>>> I would think that Red Sky (CFMX 6.1) was the result, for the most >>>>> part... >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> Would you all agree, that us ColdFusion developers deserve some >>>>>> love too!! >>>>> >>>>> Considering Allaire (and ColdFusion) might have withered away >>>>> without >>> >>>>> Macromedia's investment in the technology, I'd say that CFers got >>>>> quite a bit of love... >>>>> >>>>>> Sure ColdFusion MX sports a bunch of new features that are >>>>>> fantastic and the as for old advanced features û theyÆre tighter >>>>>> than ever. I'm loving cffunction, I'm all over cfc's, and >>>>>> ColdFusion's ability to integrate with FLASH is the best thing >>>>>> since the last "best thing". >>>>> >>>>> Excellent! Glad you're happy with that at least (especially since >>>>> quite a few CFers beat on Macromedia over the 'promotion' of Flash >>>>> to >>> >>>>> CFers and the whole OO issues around CFCs). >>>>> >>>>>> However, despite all of these wonderful improvements in the server >>>>>> application, I'm still not convinced that they have committed to >>>>>> providing us with a solid "Development Environment" that supports >>>>>> the work habits of the sophisticated ColdFusion Developer. >>>>> >>>>> I think part of the problem here is that your chosen IDE becomes >>>>> your >>> >>>>> second-nature way of working and it's really hard to change. >>>>> Several >>>>> high-profile CFers have made the jump to Dreamweaver and are very >>>>> happy >>>>> - and some aren't. Dreamweaver is certainly a very different tool >>>>> to >>>>> HomeSite / CF Studio. However, CF Studio used to cost $499 and now >>> you >>>>> can get it (as HomeSite+) for just $399 by buying Dreamweaver. And >>>>> there's a 5.5 version in the works so it's not like Macromedia's >>>>> abandoned anyone here: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.macromedia.com/software/homesite/ >>>>> >>>>> Me personally, I tried CF Studio back in 2001 and just couldn't get >>>>> along with it at all. I figured that since Macromedia bought >>>>> Allaire >>>>> and we'd be using ColdFusion, I ought to use the dedicated IDE. I >>>>> really tried. But I kept going back to Dreamweaver for so many >>>>> things. And it wasn't really anything specific that I could put my >>>>> finger on and say "You know, if CFS just did 'X' (or didn't do 'Y' >>>>> every time I try 'Z') then I'd be happy..." No, it was just a >>>>> general >>> >>>>> usability issue for me - CF Studio just didn't suit me. >>>>> >>>>> So I switched back to Dreamweaver (well, UltraDev 4, actually). >>>>> Then >>>>> Dreamweaver MX came out and swallowed (the higher-priced) UltraDev >>>>> and I was still a happy camper! The CFC and Web Service browsers >>>>> are >>>>> very useful (I showed how to use the latter to quickly build CF >>>>> applications that consume Web Services in a BACFUG presentation a >>>>> while back). >>>>> >>>>> Then I switched to a Mac. Dreamweaver MX (6.0) was not as good on >>>>> the >>> >>>>> Mac as on Windows so I struggled for a while and switched to jEdit. >>>>> It wasn't ideal for me... I found it clunky and ugly and the CF >>>>> support wasn't great but it was faster and more stable than DWMX >>>>> 6.0 >>>>> on the Mac. Then the 6.1 updater came out and totally solidified >>>>> the >>>>> Mac >>>>> version: it was much faster and rock solid. So I switched, >>> gratefully, >>>>> back to DWMX as my primary CF IDE. >>>>> >>>>> I can't talk about Dreamweaver MX 2004 much (for obvious reasons!) >>>>> but I'm using a recent (internal) build and I'm very happy with it. >>>>> Site-less editing has probably been the biggest help in my workflow >>>>> as well as the new Start Page with its list of recently edited >>>>> files >>>>> and various common operations. >>>>> >>>>>> Dreamweaver still seems to be an overkill designers solutions. >>>>> >>>>> Hmm, I think depends on your perspective. I'm certainly not a >>>>> designer >>>>> - I'm a hardcore developer - but Dreamweaver fits my workflow just >>>>> fine. I don't use all of its features but I use enough to make it >>>>> worthwhile (e.g., I live and die in "sites" even tho' I find the >>>>> new >>>>> site-less editing mode very useful). >>>>> >>>>>> and as for Contribute, it must have been the boses, daughter's >>>>>> boyfriend cousin's idea. >>>>> >>>>> I'm a huge advocate of Contribute for quick updates to static sites >>>>> (and there's a lot of those). I use Contribute all the time to >>>>> maintain project intranet sites as well as parts of my personal >>>>> website. My wife uses Contribute to manage her website (which I set >>>>> up in Dreamweaver) - my wife is fairly typical of the sort of users >>>>> Contribute is aimed at. You might also be interested to know that >>>>> sections of macromedia.com are managed using Contribute - end-user >>>>> content contribution for HTML sites is its forte. >>>>> >>>>> Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ >>>>> >>>>> "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." >>>>> -- Margaret Atwood >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=t:4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com
