I've had to learn ASP to compliment my CF skills, mainly for multi-language
projects due to CF's lack of unicode support.
The main problem I have with ASP is the time it takes to do what are
relatively simple tasks in CF - for example, sending an email, retrieving a
recordset, even displaying a date in nice human-readable format. In CF these
are inbuilt functions, whereas in ASP they have to be done manually, which
takes many more lines of code.
In my opinion, if you are building database-driven websites, you are doing
these kinds of tasks all the time, so they should be built into the
language. Surely there's only one way to return a recordset - why can't it
be done in one tag?
Not to say that ASP isn't good for certain tasks. There is always a best
tool for a particular job, in our case CF's downfall has been lack of
unicode support.
As for the "for babies" argument, I think that "real programmers" should
know when to use the best tool for the job. The company I work for would not
tolerate taking four times as long to do a task just so the programmer could
feel like he was a "real" programmer.
Just my 0.02, of course.
K.
______________________________________________________
Kay Smoljak - ColdFusion Developer - PerthWeb Pty Ltd
Internet Solutions for your business!
Level 9/105 St George's Tc - Perth - Western Australia
Ph: (08) 9226 1366 Fax: (08) 9226 1375 Mobile : 0419 949 007
Visit Perth online! : www.perthweb.com.au
Tools for developers: http://developer.perthweb.com.au
-- cfx_pwimageproc: image processing tool
-- cfx_pwcardcrypt: credit card validation and encryption
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 14:11:30 -0700, David Byers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Having become relatively comfortable with ASP, I'm wondering if ColdFusion
>would be a step forward or a step backward. Recently, I went to a "3-hour
>tour" of Coldfusion, hosted by Macromedia. This introduction boosted my
>interest considerably. Knowing that they were putting their best-foot
>forward & presented only the fun & exciting aspects of CF, I want to know
>more about the real-world aspects of CF.
>
>Some of my acquaintances who have experience with both ASP and CF, told me
>that CF is for babies & ASP is for real programmers. These same people
>refuse to use Dreamweaver/Ultradev for the same reasons--they only endorse
>hand-coding.
>
>In ASP, I tend to rely on Ultradev for my layout and basic functionalities,
>then I tweak and add advanced functionality via hand-coding. This is most
>efficient for me, and if the militant hand-coders consider me a baby for
>that, so be it. I can envision myself doing the same with Ultradev then CF
>studio for the coding of advanced features. Is this a viable workflow that
>people are comfortable with?
>
>I'd like to know what other ASP users' experiences with CF have been, &
what
>their level of satisfaction has been with CF. Trying to make a case as to
>whether the expenditure to add CF capabilities would be worthwhile or not.
>
>Thanks,
>
>David Byers
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
