I'm late in this thread as always (PST time and Starbucks Coffee <that's my excuse>). The greatest advantage of Fusebox from my experience is that it enables non ColdFusion savvy developers and designers to get up to speed quickly in CF. It gives them a structured set of reference points, it is true that any well written CF Application should be logical and structured but there aren't that many Dave Watt's et al in the real CF World, My sixpence worth.
Mike Brunt Sempra Energy 213.244.5226 "A complex system that does not work is invariably found to have evolved from a simpler system that worked just fine. " -----Original Message----- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:05 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Fusebox pros and cons > > I'm not so sure that's an advantage. It might be useful > > in places, but when I'm writing a program, I usually > > want to know where the inputs for that program come from. > > The new fusedocs really are a nice touch to the current > methodology - they specifically map out what's coming in > and what's going out of each file. You can always use > studio's split screen function to keep that 'key' right at > the top of your page if you start confusing scopes. Also, > given the structure of the fusedocs, XML, you can imagine > the uses of this (ie. auto documentation-booklet generation, > visual mapping of your application, etc). Yes, that's all well and good. However, my original point, which I didn't make clear enough, is that when I write a program, that program should explicitly accept specific inputs from specific locations. This isn't a documentation issue, it's a program design issue. > I would have to say that it would be an advantage when > desigining sub-applications or modules that can be called > as custom tags. As far as knowing where inputs come from, > that would be a documentation issue. Again, as stated above, I don't see this as a documentation issue. Using the Attributes scope for everything may be useful if you want to treat everything as a custom tag; I don't find that to be appealing. Typically, modules within an existing application are linked tightly enough to the rest of the application that there's very little to be gained by calling them as custom tags, in my opinion. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ______________________________________________________________________ Why Share? Dedicated Win 2000 Server · PIII 800 / 256 MB RAM / 40 GB HD / 20 GB MO/XFER Instant Activation · $99/Month · Free Setup http://www.pennyhost.com/redirect.cfm?adcode=coldfusionc 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
