Well that's fine (and, yes, that's how you do the deployment). But a language is what you type in to the IDE or text editor, not what it compiles down to, or that one deploys. Java byte code is no more Java than CFML is, for that matter.
CFML is not Java. Java is Java. A better defence of CFML's Javaness would be to point out that one can instantiate Java classes and call methods upon them natively in CFML, but this still doesn't make CFML Java. Plus - on reflection - one can also do the same with .NET classes/objects I think and no-one is suggesting CFML is C#...? CFML is a cool language, but it's dead. The former does not preclude the latter. -- Adam On 13 March 2013 01:06, Russ Michaels <r...@michaels.me.uk> wrote: > > well, , being as it compiles to java byte code, and you can distribute any > CFML app as pure JAVA, no CFML in sight, which would make it a java app. > I have never tried this TBH, but I would presume you just deploy your app > as a war file, so it presumably would not even need a CFML engine, it will > just run directly on a java servlet engine. > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 12:56 AM, Adam Cameron < > adamcameroncoldfus...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > This is a traditionally unpopular metric with CF developers, but there's > > this: > > http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html > > > > Java's more prevalent than .NET platform languages, but that's not a > > compelling reason to use either (/or). > > > > And let's not forget that CFML is not Java, so it's a pointless > comparison > > to make anyhow. > > > > To the OP: CFML is withering away... get used to it. Take whatever > > opportunity you can to shift to a different language. Either .net-based > > languages or Java would be good options. > > > > -- > > Adam > > > > > > On 13 March 2013 00:09, Andrew Scott <andr...@andyscott.id.au> wrote: > > > > > > > > And I am sure that if you get to the real nuts and bolts of it, Java is > > > more popular on the Enterprise level than .Net is. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Andrew Scott > > > WebSite: http://www.andyscott.id.au/ > > > Google+: http://plus.google.com/113032480415921517411 > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Gerald Guido <gerald.gu...@gmail.com > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > A couple of things come to mind. First is the primary reason I use > CF: > > > > Speed of development. CF can be seen as a framework for Java much > like > > > > jQuery is a framework for JavaScript. It takes care of the bulk of > the > > > > heavy lifting and grunt work so you can focus on writing productive > > code. > > > > > > > > ,NET is a lower level language when compared to CF meaning that you > > have > > > to > > > > take care of a lot of low level chores in order to do something, If > you > > > > wanted to open a bottle of wine with another language you would first > > > have > > > > to build the bottle opener, or even smelt the steel, in order to open > > the > > > > bottle. With CF you call <CFBottleOpener /> and you are done. > > > > > > > > Justin James <http://www.techrepublic.com/search?a=justin+james> at > > > > techrepublic.com once remarked that only 25% of the time he spent > > > writing > > > > Java was writing productive code, the other 75% was taking care of > low > > > > level pluming so he can write said productive code. There is a phrase > > > down > > > > south that goes "I am fixing to get ready to... " That is what it is > > like > > > > with lower level languages like Java and .NET you (often) spend a > bulk > > of > > > > your time preparing to actually do something. > > > > > > > > Lastly, you have the entire Java Class Library at your disposal. Say > > you > > > > need to do something that CF was not designed to do or does not do > > > > particularly well you can drop down into Java or use a third party > > class > > > > library to perform said task. > > > > > > > > In short it reduces complexity, and the amount of code that one needs > > to > > > > write for the same end result. Less code = faster time to market, > less > > > > chance for bugs and lowers the cost of development. > > > > > > > > Sorry if I am rambling... It is late in the day. > > > > HTH. > > > > G! > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Justin Scott < > leviat...@darktech.org > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For those of u on this list that have experience with both, can I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Gerald Guido > > > > http://www.myinternetisbroken.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| 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:354961 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
