> I know very few CF developers who know JAVA, that mostly > stems form people who were programmers before learning > CF or have a programming background, so I think your > putting yourself down there if you think you're the only > one who doesn't do it, in fact the majority of the people > on this very list don't do Java. I also know many > freelance developer and development companies who do high > profile government work and work for very large/rich > organisations, and none of them use any OO frameworks, > most of them use their own or fusebox. And they are > certainly not picking up scraps.
Sure, there are lots of people who are doing well in that niche today, and there will be tomorrow, but there are fewer of them every year. We work in an environment of planned obsolescence -- we create new things, knowing very well that they will be supplanted in years to come. This is the nature of programming. A good developer needs to be constantly becoming, otherwise you have to face the fact that if you don't continue to learn, your skill is gradually devalued by simple economics and your niche disappears. I struggle with this myself actually, because it's the one thing I really dislike about programming work, the knowledge that what I do today will be basically irrelevant in a few years time, as compared to the works of philosophers and artists which are as valuable today as they were hundreds or thousands of years ago. I would like to think that the "work of my hand" would have lasting meaning, but I have to accept that programming work is not, no matter how innovative or productive it may be. > It really depends if you job requires any of these things > as to whether you spend time learning it. I would love to > have the time to sit down and properly learn Java, .NET, > every other framework, but alas I don't even have time to > spend posting on these lists very often as I work hard, > I only get to do it at the evening and on weekends. Once > upon a time I used to be one of the people that was on > the list all day answering everyones questions instead > of working ;-) A solid understanding of OO principals, encapsulation and extensibility are key elements to my having extra time to spend being an Adobe Community Expert and helping people learn new things. The rule manager article I contributed to a recent issue of CFDJ and later presented at cf.Objective are good examples. My presentation skills need some work, I'll admit that, and I found a number of things that I could have done quite a bit better at cf.Objective, however, the material in question is something that can save anyone who has more than one client lots of time. The rule manager facade is a good way to let OO encapsulation reduce the number of customization points in an application that will be used for multiple clients. Going back to the example of Site Manageware, we planned to use that same concept (although they weren't sold on XML as a storage medium) to eliminate the customization point for commissions paid to sales staff. Their existing system was rather problematic -- a rule manager in that spot would / will (I assume they're still planning to implement it) save them large amounts of time in the configuration of rules for sales commissions. In my case I wrote the rule manager facade once, and have implemented it now twice. Writing the initial code for the facade took several weeks. Each implementation has taken a few hours, and the result of those implementations makes the applications they're in far more flexible than comparable applications. Compare Blogs onTap to BlogCFC (not saying it's bad, just comparing) -- out of the box, BlogCFC would have to be customized if you wanted to limit the amount of time a person could comment on a blog entry (don't ask me why that's desirable, I just remember seeing someone mention it iirc with regard to Blogger). With Blogs onTap all you have to do is create a new blog, edit the comment rule (in your browser) and add a single criteria to indicate that comments can be posted within X number of days from the date the article was published. I didn't really plan that, I just knew after having implemented the rule manager that it allowed you to do that out of the box. I also am planning another rule manager implementation in the contact manager application I'm working on currently. Every time I implement it, I'm trading a few hours of implementation for what could otherwise be several weeks of development work (or a long chain of "death of a thousand cuts" style change requests over the course of the coming years). > At the end of the day, it's each to his own, I have > my opinion and I couldn't care less who likes what > framework at the end of the day, Then why did you bather to post an inflamatory message about Model-Glue at all? What were you trying to contribute? I'm really not trying to be pejorative here. This isn't a stab. I genuinely don't understand your motivation if you're really this disinterested in any kind of debate about the usefulness of frameworks. > it's not gonna make me lose any sleep or effect my work, > but the problem with people like Isaac is that they seem > to forget that a discussion list is for discussion and > people will have differing opinions, and if you cannot > accept that and are not open to it and just want to shove > your opinion down peoples throats and bolster your ego, > then your better off joining a user group or fan club > where everyone likes the same thing as you. Nope, that's not my feeling at all... yes, this is a discussion group, hence the reason why I participate in discussion. :) Did you not notice the length of my last post? Was it not thoroughly presented? Did I not provide arguments and support them? Yep, seems like discussion to me. :) My stating my opinion that developers will need to continue to learn new things is no different than your stating your opinion that Model-Glue and/or other "OO" frameworks are needless and overcomplicated. I quote "Model-glue and similar frameworks is great if you want to obfuscate your code and keep your client bound to you for any ongoing work, as only developers who already understand the framework and OO will be able to understand it, which will cut most average web developers." ... I'm not sure how much room there is for misunderstanding there... the message of "model-glue and OO suck" seems pretty clear to me. All I've done is to provide an alternative argument, and addressed very specifically arguments regarding both their complexity and the availability of experienced developers who already know how to use them. s. isaac dealey 434.293.6201 new epoch : isn't it time for a change? add features without fixtures with the onTap open source framework http://www.fusiontap.com http://coldfusion.sys-con.com/author/4806Dealey.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:237265 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
