I don't mind, but just pointing out that it's pretty much been debated into the ground. It's probably doubtful that going over it again is going to reveal much that hasn't already been covered (I've mentioned the testability argument in many of the previous threads on this over the years). Really, the bottom line is that either appraoch is better than directly referencing the session scope all over the code. And encapsulating it like this should also force one to think about just what is going into the shared scope. (This is why I dislike the "generic" session facade approach so much, because it allows dumping anything into the session). Personally, I rarely have to store more than two pieces of information in the session (the user ID, and a shopping cart). There are cases where more is needed, but if someone is storing tons of extra information in the session, it may mean that it's time to do some trimming. heh.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:19 AM, John Whish <[email protected]>wrote: > @Brian, I had done some research and like the idea of a façade, but don't > have the knowledge you can only gain from experience. I hadn't even thought > about testing so thanks for the heads up. > Reading a lot of those posts, they just end up in long arguments about the > pros and cons so I hope you don't mind me raising it here again :) > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFCDev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfcdev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
