Nicely done Hal. -----Original Message----- From: hal helms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 2:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Benbox was: Re: SuperQ functionality with the STANDARD core (Re: MVCquesti
Yes, we found that bug (if it is a bug) in ColdFusion and John has since released a new version that fixes the problem. Available at www.techspedition.com. -----Original Message----- From: Xavi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 1:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Benbox was: Re: SuperQ functionality with the STANDARD core (Re: MVCquesti Yes John, I find this problem with FuseQ, i�ve ta�ed the "same UDF defined in more than one place " error cause i Have a UDF getNow() that sets request.now variable cause I'm in american server and I want a spanish Time. I can't use FuseQ for my site. -----Mensaje original----- De: John Quarto-vonTivadar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Enviado el: jueves, 23 de mayo de 2002 21:49 Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Asunto: Benbox was: Re: SuperQ functionality with the STANDARD core (Re: MVCquestion) so far I haven't heard anyone mention any problems with running their FB3 compliant code on CFMX However, there might be a problem if you use any UDF's, at least with regard to CFMX. It seems that if you define your UDFs in one spot and then CFMODULE a fuseaction that you will get one of those "same UDF defined in more than one place " errors (which suggests that UDFs have a request scope????) . I haven't had a huge amount of time to confirm this fully but I've seen at least once instance where it occured, and the same code worked fine in CF5. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Benjamin S. Rogers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 2:40 PM Subject: RE: SuperQ functionality with the STANDARD core (Re: MVCquestion) > Steve, > > I converted my own app framework, which differs quite a bit from Fusebox > in the layout department. However, I don't see any reason why the > fusebox method can't be converted. I do think the Fusebox > > I was going to try converting one of the sample layout apps on the > Fusebox site but ColdFusion MX seems to be having some difficulty with > some of the templates. After a bit of debugging, I think the problem > resides in ColdFusion, not the sample apps. I'm going to work on it a > bit more (tonight maybe) and may be posting a bug to the Macromedia > forums. > > I'll let you know if I make any progress. Sorry. > > Benjamin S. Rogers > http://www.c4.net/ > v.508.240.0051 > f.508.240.0057 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 11:33 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: SuperQ functionality with the STANDARD core (Re: > MVCquestion) > > > Well that's news to me. I'd be interested in seeing how that works. > > Steve > > "Benjamin S. Rogers" wrote: > > > > > Well it's really going to be a personal preference. Personally for > > > me, Fusebox 3 still solves MUCH more than CFCs do. The web services > > > in CFCs seem great, but I have only needed a web service 2 times in > > > the last year, whereas I've needed nested layouts in EVERY project. > > > > I actually used CFCs for nesting layouts as well. Though I'm sure it > > wasn't exactly what Macromedia intended for CFCs, it works very well. > > Actually, now that I think about, I'm not sure the Allaire programmer > > that wrote the CFInclude tag intended for Fusebox either. :) > > > > Benjamin S. Rogers > > http://www.c4.net/ > > v.508.240.0051 > > f.508.240.0057 > > > > > ==^================================================================ 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 ==^================================================================
