Zac, You might be right, but I must admit I don't know that many developers personally. The ones I do know, however, don't use Fusebox.
I think what would be helpful for people is a study that not only shows the PROS and CONS of Fusebox, but an actual application that is written with Fusebox versus a "regular" methodology. Of course, you run the risk of people saying... "But that study is comparing Fusebox to x methodology..." If you take 10 developers' coding methods, none Fusebox, and study them, you'll probably see 10 different ways to do the same thing; some better than others. So the question is, for me, is Fusebox comprised of the best, most efficient coding techniques, while maintaining simplicity? Since ColdFusion is an interpreted language, too much complexity in that tier seems to go against the ideals of the language. For instance, I've looked over CFObjects and I think it was created by very talented individuals. For me, it doesn't do anything that will speed up my development time, or the actual finished application. It adds complexity to a simple language, in my opinion. After about 2 1/2 years, I've finally developed my own standard for coding ColdFusion applications that I feel comfortable with, replete with directory naming conventions, file naming conventions, and a simple yet effective way to port my code to any machine (given the software requirements of the ColdFusion version they may be running), and many other techniques I've learned over time that make my life easier. There are many things to take into account when sticking to a standard. I am constanly saying "What if I need to do x? Is doing x reasonable? Is my methodology capable of handling doing x?" I think asking questions like that, regardless of what methodology you use, will help you finally settle on either a methodology that is already in place, or turn you in the direction of creating your own, or taking the existing and creating a hybrid. Anyone that is a competent ColdFusion developer can learn Fusebox, whether it's required by an employer or just the individual need to learn something new. Worry about learning the language well, first. Then you can evaluate any methodology based on what it does to make your coding faster and easier to manage. -Andy > -----Original Message----- > From: Zac Belado [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 5:26 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Fusebox - opinions? > > > > I think the difference is that there is a good chance that an outside > > contractor might already know Fusebox. That won't be the case for > > something custom. > > Maybe this is a regional thing but none of the developers I know > use Fusebox > at all. Just how many people actively use fusebox? > > I hear people mention that developers or contractors will be familiar with > it but has anyone ever done any sort of polling to determine this? > > If not its mostly just an anecdotal comment isn't it? > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm 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
