Rob, "Of course, part of the beauty of CF is that you can now code procedural, hybrid, and OO - take your pick." Hit the nail on the head I'd say. This is akin to saying, what methodology you use is up to you and your particular problem to solve, eh? CF is a multi=purpose tool for sure. You can go the whole nine, or just a yard or two, eh?
Nathan...no FUD intended, just in the throws of 'CF growing pains' I suppose. I'm using CFCs now and all, but I seem to violate many of the best practises I read. But then I think perhaps many of these best practises are ultra idealistic OOPs. Time to read more OOP stuff I suppose....learn about which camp to pitch a tent in. Doug >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Behalf Of Rob Brooks-Bilson >Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 11:53 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE:CFC and actual use? (was [CFCDev] two CFC bad >practices... ) > > > >Doug, > >We're actually finding it much faster to code CFC based >applications now >than purely procedural style CFML apps. Add in emerging >frameworks like >Mach-ii, and I think you'll find that once past the initial >learning curve, >the benefits become much more apparent. > >Of course, part of the beauty of CF is that you can now code >procedural, >hybrid, and OO - take your pick. I'd also argue that apps >don't need to be >complex in order to take advantage of CFCs. Take Ray Camden's >blog.cfc. >It isn't really very complex (no offense Ray!), but it is a >perfect example >of encapsulating functionality in CFCs. I'm sure other list >members have >similar stories. > >-Rob > > > > >>>>hmm...interesting. The more I hear on this discussion the >more I wonder >just how much CFCs are even needed in day to day apps. How >many apps are >really complex enough to use them? But then I wonder, to me >CFML is a "4g" >styled procedural lang encapsulating "3g" styled langs, is >this abstraction >really needed in CF? Throw in the fact that a web app typically has a >short life span and I wonder even more. > >...some random thoughts on this topic. > >Doug > > >---------------------------------------------------------- >You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email >to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe cfcdev' >in the message of the email. > >CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported >by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). > >An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
