I agree, Tim, but John didn't call anyone an ass or make snide remarks about "Mr. Personality". That's juvenile, schoolyard behavior. When the few people who are so public in their detraction of John do ANYTHING of the scale John has done for Fusebox, I'd be interested in hearing from them. Again, until then, I think a bit of respect is in order.
Anyway, I'm violating my own rules about this type of discussion: let's move this to fbcommunity. -----Original Message----- From: Timothy Heald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 5:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: cferror Now Hal he took his own cheap shots at the new "competition". Good for the goose..... Tim Heald ACP/CCFD :) Application Development www.schoollink.net > -----Original Message----- > From: hal helms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 5:47 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: cferror > > > You're right, Steve: that is illogical and mean-spirited as well. John > is a very decent person who sometimes comes across badly on email. > I've publicly called him on this, but John has given an enormous > amount to the Fusebox community, not the least of which is that John > did the first write of the Fusebox 3 core file and nested layouts is > John's baby, which he worked long and hard on. I think you might show > a little respect. > > What you do with adoption of FuseQ or not is your business, but I > think cheap shots like you've taken are completely uncalled for. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Bryant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 11:16 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: cferror > > > It isn't logical, but I am inclined to lean towards Fusium's approach > just because John so consistently comes off as an ass on this list. I > am sure > > that both approaches have legitimate merit. > > I actually had the opportunity to meet John at this year's Fusebox > conference and talk to him for a few minutes. I was amazed to discover > that in person he actually seems like a nice guy. John, when I met you > I liked > you. But your posts can be really annoying. > > Also, I went to techspedition.com and I found this line "note: the > Techspedition fusebox core files carry a special license > prerequisite". Interesting. > > At 02:17 PM 5/6/2002 +0800, you wrote: > >Thanks guys, > > > >I feel like I'm in the middle of an ummm... difference of opinion? So > >let me get this straight... In this corner, Techspedition have > >implemented a coding method for advanced error handling, but it's not > >released yet. In the other corner, FEX is a modified core file that > >has > > >custom API vars for error handling. What JohnQ here is subtly calling > >"some new, unproven hot-fix". ouch. > > > >I'd love to try both of these approaches... they both sound very > >interesting. But seeing as this site is going live in 12.4 seconds, > >I'll stick with what I have so far, which is now working fine - I had > >already figured out something along the lines of what JohnQ mentioned > >with the suppresslayout vars. > > > >I can see that once again, it's going to get very interesting around > >here... > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: John Quarto-vonTivadar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >Sent: Monday, 6 May 2002 1:37 PM > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: RE: cferror > > > > > >Kay, > > > >I think you're making the right choice -- when a site is going live > >into production the last thing you want to do is to start using some > >new, unproven hot-fix that could well throw unexpected problems into > >what is already a stressful situation. > > > >Since you're in a fix, one quick and dirty solution is you can use a > >local variable such as suppresslayout which would normally be set to > >FALSE in fbx_settings, and then where you had your cferror, instead > >of using cfabort do <cfset suppresslayout = TRUE> and then in your > >fbx_layouts do <cfif suppresslayout> <cfset fusebox.layoutfile=""> > ></cfif> > > > >make sure this is in all the fbx_layouts files to the suppress will > >"nest" on the way "up" > > > >one doesn't need to modify the core file in any way to handle the > >simplest error trapping, such as what you've described needing, as > >long > > >as you stop the nested layout process from occuring which is what > >suppresslayout does in the above example. That should at least get > >you through Monday. > > > >If you wish to use a robust implementation to handle your bubbling > >error and exception handling, then call me at the main number at > >Techspedition.com on Monday after 3pm and before 10pm NYC time. Two > >lines of code to achieve bubbling like that won't take long on the > >phone > >-- again the advantage being that anyone working with FuseQ doesn't > have > >to modify the core file or create new fusebox API variables for any > sort > >of bubbling exception handling -- that benefit derives naturally from > >our implementation of the FB3 spec. that everyone is familiar with. > Code > >works out of the box, just like C code runs without incident in C++ > >). > > > >p.s. The Synthis people demo'ed the newest version of Adalon this > >weekend and it will *knock your socks off* with phenomenal support > >for wireframing and pre-prototyping. Synthis also announced that the > >future > > >versions of Adalon will support FuseQ. When hard-core java people > >like Synthis begin supporting and approving FuseQ, then I know we are > >on the > > >right track. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Kay Smoljak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2002 10:22 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: cferror > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have a site going live today. I've put a cferror tag in, but > > > when it > > > > > gets triggered it displays its content followed by the normal > > > layout. I tried putting a cfabort tag directly after the cferror, > > > but it didn't have any effect. I'm aware of the modified core > > > files available, but this is going live today. (yeah, yeah, I > > > know, last minute changes are bad). Is there any way to do this? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Kay. > > > > ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [email protected] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrFMa.bV0Kx9 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
