Billy gets the cf_trophy for post of the day., -----Original Message----- From: BILLY CRAVENS [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 3:57 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Fusebox - opinions?
You're right, that isn't always possible, but I agree with the principle Jeffry was discussing. There's far too many "methodology" developers out there. Whether it's Fusebox, "Session" dependent development, or whatever, it's unfortunate that many developers are a bit narrow minded (in their overall knowledge - I don't mean that as a personal attack). That's why I'm a big fan of not teaching methodologies to beginning developers. Methodologies leverage the language, not vice versa. (I've seen developers who have developed in nothing but Fusebox cower at the form scope, running away, screaming "CF_FormURL2Attributes, where art thou? Rescue me from thy savage beast!" :) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 2:45 PM Subject: Re: Fusebox - opinions? > You know, its all nice to have the original developer explain his > methodology but sometimes that just isn't possible. > > -Craig > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bryan Stevenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 2:37 PM > Subject: Re: Fusebox - opinions? > > > > Here Here! > > > > Bryan Stevenson > > VP & Director of E-Commerce Development > > Electric Edge Systems Group Inc. > > p. 250.920.8830 > > e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Allaire Alliance Partner > > www.allaire.com > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jeffry Houser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 3:32 PM > > Subject: RE: Fusebox - opinions? > > > > > > > Yes, but any developer worth his salt should be able to pick up a > > > *documented* methodology and work within it given an hour or so to look > > > over the documentation. I was on a project, where the first thing they > > did > > > was have me sit down with the lead developer. He dictated everything > from > > > the directory structure of the project to the casing (I.E. upper / lower > > > case of the letters ) to use for SQL statements. I took notes, and > there > > > was never a problem. > > > In addition to a methodology, properly documented code should be > easily > > > picked up. > > > > > > > > > At 03:05 PM 11/19/2001 -0500, you wrote: > > > >The problem with making your own methodology up is that only the people > > you > > > >have taight it to will know it, the benefit of fusebox and any other > > popular > > > >methodology is that there are support forums, sample applications, and > > white > > > >papers that you can work off of. > > > > > > > >Robert Everland III > > > >Dixon Ticonderoga > > > >Web Developer Extraordinaire > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > >From: Zac Belado [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > >Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 3:06 PM > > > >To: CF-Talk > > > >Subject: RE: Fusebox - opinions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are > > > > > looking to try and instill good disciplines and readability in your > > code > > > > > Fusebox is also good for that. > > > > > > > >This presumes that the developers know fusebox. > > > > > > > >You could also get this same benefit from documenting your methods and > > > >making sure your developers follow a single standard. > > > > > > > >Fusebox doesn't bring anything to development (in these terms) that any > > > >other documented methodology would. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
