I'm surprised that Vince Bonfanti's blog post on interfaces vs. mixins
(http://blog.newatlanta.com/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=F17880FB-12E2-D573-B881AA26B14EBCC5)
hasn't gotten much of a reaction? Compared to an older post on Sean
Corfield's blog
(http://www.corfield.org/blog/index.cfm/do/blog.entry/entry/Interfaces_in_ColdFusion)?
Is this because we're all sick of the debate?
One thing that's nagging me about Mixins is, that when working on a
complex application with a good sized team, it becomes hard to determine
why (or even when :( ) an object possesses certain operatons.
I mean, in Java, if you have:
public class Duck implements Fryable, Throwable, Serializable{}
It's evident that someone needs to fry a duck, have a ballistic duck,
and a transmit a duck down a wire (Whether it's over IP or sneakernet or
whether it's flies is largely irrelevant at this point, but you can
count on it to be transmitted when the need comes).
Whereas with mixins, at some stages you have a comatose duck, a fryable
duck, and a flameproof duck, an unliftable duck, and duck that's too fat
to fit into a wire.
Maybe it's because I know java, and have not much to do with Ruby apart
from a RoR Hello World, but I have a feeling that I'm missing a point?
And what about the mention that the next release of BD will have CFC
interface support? And the rumours at WebDU that CF8 will have
interfaces as well?
--
Haikal Saadh, Applications Programmer
Teaching and Learning Support Services
K405, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus
[EMAIL PROTECTED], 3864 8633
CRICOS No. 00213J
----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to
[email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the
email.
CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting
(www.cfxhosting.com).
An archive of the CFCDev list is available at
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
