I have to agree. CF gets its bad name because of its programmer base. CFML is a great language. CF5 is a pretty good hack at an application server. CFMX is even better (though its COM stuff sux big time, hopefully the 1st SP will bring it back on par with CF5).
JSP/ASP get accolades because the learning curve is a little higher, and hence, filters out the would-be programmers that do not understand basic client-server and n-tier coding philosophy/religion/theory/whathaveyou. OR, the JSP/ASP programmers are really just web designers who have no clue how the Java Beans or COM objects are implemented. And hence, the complexity of implementing a robust bean/COM is left to better programmers in the realm of compiled languages. That's the idea behind a model-view-controller application framework. But JSP/ASP still gets the credit for being "better". :P The reason Java/C/C++/.NET gets accolades and is preferred even though it is not as RAD a paradigm as script/interpreted languages like Perl and CFML is because of the same reason. They have a steeper learning curve, and hence, people with zero exposure to concepts of software engineering gets filtered out. Of course, tools like MS Visual Studio NET, other cool IDEs helps good programmers do things faster, but they also help create nightmarish apps from novice programmers or programmer-wannabes. That said, I have seen plenty of badly coded Java/C/C++ proggies. :) CFML in the hands of a good programmer/app-designer, who understands the nature of a web application (n-tiered; MUST work for large number of multiple-concurrent users; stateless transport protocol that requires application level session management through use of unreliable/insecure session token transmitted via cookies or querystring; multiple-inconsistent presentation layer rendering engines (read: browsers); et cetera et cetera), leads to RAD and robust/scalable applications with a *minor* performance hit due to the "interpreted" nature of the language. Who are these guys? Example: Forta, Watts, Dinowitz. :) They are not "perfect", but they are darn good. So, uhm, Keith? Please don't feel offended. Experience + Knowledge = Wisdom. What you have is probably plenty of experience, but not enough of "knowledge". Yeah. It is a Friday. I feel dangerous and lazy. :P Back to work... =) ---------------------------- James Ang Senior Programmer MedSeek, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 9:30 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: RE: Application Slow Down was RE: Absolutely necessary to cflock session variables > However, there's a common misconception that CF doesn't scale. It > does - but > not all CF applications scale. I think this perception is falling by the wayside real fast these days. Finally. > This, specifically, is the reason why I felt it worth my time to > respond to > this yet again. There are many features within CF, or any other > programminglanguage, that are potentially dangerous when used > incorrectly. It's a bad > idea, I think, to simply say "they work" when in many cases, they > won'tprovide the intended effect - a functional, satisfactory > application that > can support its userbase with the amount of hardware that it has. This is something I think that CF programmers fall into quite often. The amount of misuse I see is astounding. Ah well. ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
