The other camp's argument (for the variables scope): it is not necessary so why do it?
Eric (who is in the scope everything camp) -----Original Message----- From: John Allen [mailto:johnfal...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 03:05 PM To: cf-talk Subject: Re: scoping +1 for always scoping. Clearer to read, small performance gain, small security gain and why not. On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Mike Chabot <mcha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Always scope your variables, unless you have a specific reason not to. > It reinforces a good habit and demonstrates to anyone reviewing your > code that you know what scoping variables is all about. I would > estimate that roughly 100% of experienced CF programmers would agree > that scoping local variables does more good than harm. Even though > scoping local variables doesn't add much value to the Web site, it > does help separate you from the masses of inexperienced CF programmers, and that is enough of a reason to do it. > > -Mike Chabot > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Eric Roberts < > ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > > > > > We had a discussion at work as to whether or not we should scope > > local > vars > > with the "variables." scope since that is implied in a cfset. One > > camp says it is not needed because of the implicit scoping when > > using cfset...the other camp says it is better to tack on > > "variables." and make it explicit for security and readability. Any > > thoughts? > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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:344633 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
