While I might prefer to do things the way you describe, I hesitate to call these things "best practices".
> Hm, I respectfully disagree with putting functions in cfm pages entirely no > matter how it's being pulled. I think there's a place for functions and > that's in cfcs. You do realize there really isn't a right or wrong answer to this, right? Functions existed well before CFCs - does that mean that well-written applications predating the use of CFCs are now poorly-written? > You say you have a lot of utility functions that don't need to be in a cfc. > If you have a lot of them, why not just create a cfc called utility and > stick them all in one cfc? What does that buy you, exactly? The big value of CFCs for many people is that they let you adhere to OO conventions. But utility functions don't really follow those conventions anyway. > Also, if you stick functions and include them most likely your talking to > that function using scoped variables which as other have mentioned is > usually a bad practice to do using functions. Why is that a bad practice? How are functions different from any other variables? And you might be just as likely to do this with CFCs as without - you can store those in these scopes as well. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ http://training.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software is a Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) on GSA Schedule, and provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers, online, or onsite. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:339150 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
