>
> However,
> neither approach (app scope / passing in object) will bite you in the ass
> so
> I guess it boils down to how you feel about it.
>
I kinda figured that. Just want some other eyeballs looking at it to make
sure I was not missing something stupid. Thanx.
I'm curious to know what the udf is and what the custom tag is doing though,
> perhaps there is a more sensible approach that bypasses the dilemma
> alltogether.
>
It is just a collection of utility func's for misc chores like creating SES
urls, creating zebra stripes etc. Like I said, I am not sure if I want to
put them in a CFC at this juncture. I am not sure what that would buy me.
The custom tag is (literally) just a glorified cfinclude, except that it is
encapsulated so the variables and queries that you pass it "stay in Vegas",
as it were. So you can have multiple includes on a view and there won't be
any cross talk.
<cf_include
template = "views/whatever.cfm"
variables="#MyStrcut#"
query="#get_whatever#">
If so, I'd want it
> not to need to use those functions at all if possible or, if not, the tag
> could contain the udf so that it was entirely independent. If app specific,
> my preference would be to pass in a reference to the object.
Interesting. I hadn't considered that. It is part of a larger methodology
that would be used in many apps so I would want to keep them separate from
the tags. Although they would be used in the views most of the time, but you
never know. Maybe I could include the UDF in the custom tag. Another thing I
did not think of.
I am just thinking out loud, trying to think things through and I thought I
would solicit other ppl's opinions.
Thanx for the help. Much appreciated.
G!
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:27 AM, Dominic Watson <
watson.domi...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> For me it kinda depends on the scope of the custom tag. Is it something you
> would potentially use in other, non related applications? If so, I'd want
> it
> not to need to use those functions at all if possible or, if not, the tag
> could contain the udf so that it was entirely independent. If app specific,
> my preference would be to pass in a reference to the object. However,
> neither approach (app scope / passing in object) will bite you in the ass
> so
> I guess it boils down to how you feel about it.
>
> I'm curious to know what the udf is and what the custom tag is doing
> though,
> perhaps there is a more sensible approach that bypasses the dilemma
> alltogether.
>
> Dominic
>
>
--
Gerald Guido
http://www.myinternetisbroken.com
"To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk."
-- Thomas A. Edison
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:325978
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
