Charlie, I never knew about the cfhtmlhead tag, and made the assumption that it was added.
However in my defence, I got told to use that to get what I needed done for the new Ajax UI in cf8. This came from people who should know how it works, regardless of when this tag was introduced. I do see a lack of forsight on the developers. There are many tags that are thought off, but not thought of properly. Whether this is the fault of the developers, or the alpha testers. But at the end of the day I have seen many tags / functions that have been not thought of properly. the cfhtmlhead is a typical example, why could they have not thought of its use fully back then:-) As far as from a software engineer point of view, what is the point in duplicating code? Why not factor / refactor properlly in the first place? On 1/8/08, Charlie Arehart (lists account) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Andrew, I know people hate to see these kind of debates drawn out, and I've > been warned before not to be pulled into the web you weave :-), but I can't > let you stand on your assertions. You say > > "The code behind LSDateFormat is identical to DateFormat, the only > difference is that > LSDateFormat has a wrapper to call DateFormat and guess what > DateFormat returns the > default Locale. So my question is this, why? I can see that with the > new argument locale, > that could be the only reason behind it." > > Again, the function came out several years ago, before the addition of the > new argument locale. All the discussion here yesterday was about how it > works with SetLocale. I was the first to bring up the new locale > functionality in CF8. So all the other folks here are clearly discussing (as > they should) how the LS functions can be manipulated based on the SetLocale. > DateFormat, as an example, cannot. They're not the same, dude! I think your > "Software Engineer point of view" is clouding your perspective. > > Or others jump in. Am I missing something? Again, I prefaced my first note > here by admitting that I'm no expert on localization. Many of you are. Is > Andrew on to something here? Or missing the boat? And what about Barry and > others earlier in the thread who brought all this up: have any of my points > helped you? > > As for CFHTMLHEAD, again, I find your argument pretty specious. But please > read me carefully before responding. I'm not debating your suggested > enhancement. > > You accuse it of appearing "to have ... been thrown in at the last minute", > but again it's one of the oldest tags in CFML. You can complain that it > doesn't do what you want (that seems your beef), but you can't argue that it > was thrown together at the last minute just because it doesn't meet a need > you see. Again, you're accusing the engineers of being stupid, and not > foreseeing what you see is clearly a superior approach. I daresay no one has > reconsidered that tag and its uses in the several years since it came out. > Should they? Perhaps. That's where you can file an enhancement request, so > it's good to hear that you have. (So you see, I'm not arguing that your > proposed suggestion is specious--just the assertion about the tag being so > brain dead. It does serve the needs for which it was originally created.) > > I only pressed this because you threw out the off-hand comment at the > conclusion of your earlier note that this was another example of things in > CFML "that have been added without any thinking at all". I just think those > kind of comments are incendiary and inappropriate. Again, we don't have > insight into the many decisions that go on in the engineering team, whether > when creating a tag/function or when modifying it. Do I always agree with > them? Heck no. But that's what the betas are for. Get in there early and > make your case known, as it seems you have. Just think twice about casting > the aspersions (as I now see someone else said in that "other forum that > cannot be named" which you hinted at). Really, you can make your point > without that. :-) > > /charlie > > -----Original Message----- > From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Andrew Scott > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 5:58 PM > To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com > Subject: [cfaussie] Re: should DateFormat() be depricated (in favour > ofLSDateFormat())? > > > Sure, > > First things first.... I did not read your post in its entirety so the > context of disagreeing with you, goes right out the window:-) > > But to keep the subject in its context, I do wonder what was going through > the developers minds when they created the LSDateFormat and for what > purpose. > > But I can tell you this. > > The code behind LSDateFormat is identical to DateFormat, the only difference > is that LSDateFormat has a wrapper to call DateFormat and guess what > DateFormat returns the default Locale. > > So my question is this, why? I can see that with the new argument locale, > that could be the only reason behind it. > > Anyway, I speak from a Software Engineer point of view and I do not see any > reason for 2 functions that technically do the same thing. > > Now let's talk about cfhtmlhead. > > While converting some of my extJS code over to coldfusion 8, I found that a > lot of it broke with JS code couldn't be found. Yet there they are in the > view source, so when I went investigating and did some further tests, the JS > HAS to be in the html HEAD tag. So with that in mind I got told that is why > this tag exists. > > So let's now look at why this is a hack at its best. > > To use this as it currently is one has to do this. > > <cfsavecontent variable="Test"> > ... Some JS code. > </cfsavecontent> > > <cfhtmlhead text="#Test#"> > > Now I can't discuss where I am talking about this, but I can tell you that I > have full support on some recommendations from suggested by Sean Corfield > and it has been filed as an ER. > > My reasoning is simple, the one thing I hate is messy code, JS all over the > place code not where it should be etc. And I didn't even know about this > tag, until a few weeks ago. > > But let's look at the CF8 Ajax stuff. > > If it was me and I knew that this tag had to exist why could it not have > been designed to do this. > > <cfhtmlhead language="Javascript"> > ...Some JS Code > </cfhtmlhead> > > Or even > > <cfhtmlhead language="vbScript"> > ...Some JS Code > </cfhtmlhead> > > Or > > <cfhtmlhead style="CSS"> > ...Some CSS styles > </cfhtmlhead> > > Can you understand how a little more though would make something like this > tag, appear to have not been thrown in at the last minute? > > Andrew Scott > > > > > -- Senior Coldfusion Developer Aegeon Pty. Ltd. www.aegeon.com.au Phone: +613 8676 4223 Mobile: 0404 998 273 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
