> with, much less having a consistent interface provided by MM which
> allows others who are Java knowledgeable to create, package and
> distribute additional gateways. At which point, yes, it is a very
> valid argument. The end result will be that developers who are not
> Java knowledgeable will be able to do things which would otherwise
> require extensive knowledge of Java.
>
My response was in relation to writing an event gateway; not using an
existing one. CF does not make it easier or harder to write an event gateway
since you can only write an event gateway in CF. Further, writing an event
gateway requires knowledge of Java. Thus, you argument is not valid. If you
are going to argue against me then you have to stay in the context of the
thread of positions don't make sense.
> <cfset mystruct.mykey = 0>
>
> I use the CF -- CF uses the Java object. This is not the same thing as
> me using the underlying Java object.
>
What about <cfset mystruct.put("foo", "bar")>?
> Probably. But very few (if any) are using their own application
> schemes instead of <cfapplication>.
>
What does that have to do with cflogin or frameworks?
-Matt
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
