should work.
I don't know how it works under the covers tho' - in CFMX includes are
compiled separately (which is why they have to follow tag consistency and
nesting rules inside themselves). I'm not sure how CFMX is handling
"remote" method calls like this. it might hurt performance.
Also I'm not sure how good CFMX is above recompiling CFCs when a CFINCLUDED
part of them has been updated. I don't think there's a problem there, but
you might want to test it out.
I don't know if Macromedia has addressed the scoping issue officially in any
way (but since they use CFINCLUDING function bodies as an example in the CFC
documentation I really hope they do!)
Jim Davis
_____
From: Michael Hodgdon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 3:24 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: does this violate good form for components?
>That's why I include the function and not the contents of the function
>into the component.
>
>Jim Davis wrote:
>
>> I recently had to rewrite a ton of my code to deal with this issue.
Hi Jim, we had heard that about including inside a function. The code that
I showed to you however does not include the contents of the function, it is
an include of the whole function. So one of those cfincludes would have
<cffunction ... arguments ...>
... code ....
</cffunction>
does this nasty little var scope / cfinclude issue happen whenever you use
cfinclude on a cfc ANYWHERE or just when you use cfinclude inside a FUNCTION
itself?
Also, do you happen to have any reference to tech notes from macromedia?
Thanks a bunch.
Michael
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
