This looks like a really interesting idea but if I understand correctly (and
I don't think I do), you would only be doing a series of cascaded
includes...what happens when you have a module call (for example my queries
are commonly called as modules so that I can pass and return a query name)?
I am just curious because your idea was enticing.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: stas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 2:34 PM
To: Fusebox
Subject: Re: arguments **against** fusebox
While I use Fusebox, for myself I can sum up the methodology like this:
route all app requests through index.cfm. Now, this isn't a whole lot, is
it?
It'd be great if you could do something like this:
<cfinclude template="app_globals.cfm">
<cfparam name="attributes.fuseaction" default="workspace">
<cf_bodycontent>
<cfswitch expression="#listfirst(attributes.fuseaction,".")#">
<cfloop query = "request.app.modules">
<cfoutput>
<cfcase value="#request.app.modules.fuseaction#">
<cfinclude template="#request.app.modules.fusetemplate#">
</cfcase>
</cfouput>
</cfloop>
</cfswitch>
</cf_bodycontent>
<cfinclude template="app_layout.cfm">
Of course, you can't use <cfcase value="#request.app.modules.fuseaction#">,
but maybe with multiple <cfif>s. Too bad. This would allow one to build a
DB based CASE tool and greatly simplify prototyping and documenting. The
same could be accomplished with a custom tool that would simply write the
source code for you. However, this would require locking down Fusebox's
feature set (sort of like standardization, no?). But if there was such a
tool, the time to write the main and nested fireboxes would be greatly
minimized.
If that's not done, Fusebox just remains (for me) - route all app requests
through index.cfm.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Jennings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Fusebox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 12:36 PM
Subject: RE: arguments **against** fusebox
> > Agreed. We just bought the book hoping for more specifics, and I
> > must admit
> > that I was a little disappointed.
>
> Wow, I paid $30 for something that to me is worth at least $100. And yes,
I
> did FB _before_ buying the book. But there's some stuff in the book that
> really got my brain moving in a different direction -- especially the FD2
> part.
>
> > or lay down any absolute standards. (Please bear in
> > mind that I'm still bitter about having to purchase
> > an "open standard.")
>
> You didn't pay for an open standard, you paid for a book telling you about
> an open standard. There's a big difference between the two. If someone
> doesn't want to pay they can go to fusebox.org and get the details for
free.
>
> Jay
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
