In my days at university, we were told:
"All sufficiently powerful programming languages are equivalent".
My version goes like this:
"All sufficiently powerful programming methodologies are equivalent".
In other words, it's not ENORMOUSLY important which methodology you use.
It's mostly just important that you DO use one.
FuseBox seems to fit the bill. It is sufficiently powerful (ie anything you
can do in CF, you can do in FuseBox), and it doesn't put up many obstacles
in the developer's way.
Even more important than that, it seems to be the FIRST openly documented,
freely available, no-charge, methodology/architecture/philosophy described
for the CF context. I'm sure it's not perfect, but I AM sure that if we ALL
use it, then we'll ALL be much better off. If I go off and develop my own
fantastic methods, then i'm ADDING to the CONFUSION. Much better that I
throw my lot in with FuseBox, and work on improving it for everybody.
Surely one universally-used methodology, even though imperfect, is better
than ten thousand superior methodologies.
bye now,
Lee (Bjork) Borkman
http://bjork.net ColdFusion Tags by Bjork
IMPORTANT NOTICE:
This e-mail and any attachment to it is intended only to be read or used by
the named addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged
information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any
mistaken transmission to you. If you receive this e-mail in error, please
immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not
disclose, copy or use any part of this e-mail if you are not the intended
recipient. The RTA is not responsible for any unauthorised alterations to
this e-mail or attachment to it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
