Re: IHTK 3.17 THE CFMX UPDATE
On Thursday 17 Jul 2003 07:18 am, Lewis Sellers wrote: > After being bugged to death about it, I released a version of IHTK (3.17) Of what ? No google hits -- Thomas C Advanced ColdFusion Programmer HANDLE WITH EXTREME CARE: This Email Contains Minute Electrically Charged Particles Moving at Velocities in Excess of Five Hundred Million Miles Per Hour. PLEASE ALSO NOTE: I don't speak for the company that sent this. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
IHTK 3.17 THE CFMX UPDATE
Speaking of CFMX After being bugged to death about it, I released a version of IHTK (3.17) that works with CFMX (no updates). Macromedia subscribed me to their beta program (I guess some of them were tired of being bugged about it as well) so I was going to do a little more testing of it with Redsky over the weekend. (Not of course that I can say anything concerning it and the beta beyond "It works!" or "Crap, it still doesn't work!") I mention this for the reason that those of you using IHTK know that to properly test it you need _a lot_ of workstations and servers in various configurations. It's been two years since the last update of IHTK. If it still doesn't work for you you _might_ want to speak up know or forever hold your peace. :) (I'm not normally subscribed to this list, so... you know.) --min ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
FB 4 for CF 5? (was: Cons to Fusebox)
Is FB 4 for CF 5 still in the works? -Brad > -Original Message- > From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:49 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Cons to Fusebox > > > On Wednesday, Jul 16, 2003, at 11:20 US/Pacific, Michael T. Tangorre > wrote: > > Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or > > Fusebox in general. > > I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased > > results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for > > some cons as I have a decent list of pros. > > Have a read of: > http://www.corfield.org/index.php?fuseaction=fusebox.main > > I'm not exactly a fan of FB - I've been *very* critical of it (and some > of its proponents!) in the past but, as you can see from the URL, I > rewrote my personal site using FB3/PHP for the experience, and wrote > that up too. > > FB4 is a nice refinement of FB3, replacing the various CF > infrastructure files (that you had to modify every time you changed > anything) with a simple, clean XML file, as well as adding a plugin > system. I haven't spent much time looking at it but there's some clever > stuff in there (including the parsing and compilation of the XML down > to CF code I believe so that 'production mode' is much faster). > > Mach II (nee Fusebox MX) is a radically different beast and also worth > looking at. I've started a fledgling area about it and will be building > a version of my site using Mach II soon (no idea where I'll deploy it > yet! :) > http://www.corfield.org/index.php?fuseaction=machii.main > > Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ > > "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." > -- Margaret Atwood > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Using relative links in a common header
> How do I construct the href in the tag to work independently of where > the template is within the directory tree? I want to be able to take this > whole app and to be able to place it anwhere in an existing web directory tree > without modification, so I can't use absolute referencing to the style sheet, > unless the link were dynamically generated by CF. You already got some good suggestions, another potential solution would be this UDF: http://www.cflib.org/udf.cfm?ID=841 Do something like this: relativeFilePath(GetBaseTemplatePath(),GetCurrentTemplatePath()) To get a feeling of how it works Massimo Foti Certified Dreamweaver MX Developer Certified Advanced ColdFusion MX Developer http://www.massimocorner.com/ ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: fusebox class diagrams...
On Wednesday, Jul 16, 2003, at 22:17 US/Pacific, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Anyone know the name of the program they are using to model the > classes here? > http://beta.fusebox.org/images/ClassDiagram_1.gif I'm pretty sure it was gModeler: http://www.gskinner.com/gmodeler/ Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
fusebox class diagrams...
Anyone know the name of the program they are using to model the classes here? http://beta.fusebox.org/images/ClassDiagram_1.gif -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Load balanced code replication
On Wednesday, Jul 16, 2003, at 13:17 US/Pacific, Barney Boisvert wrote: > We use rsync for doing all our installation and mirroring, be it code > or > data. Very nice, and works over an SSH connection for security. It's > native to *nix, but I believe there is a Windows port. Yes, there is. And rsync is very nice indeed. > The one problem with it is that it touches > ALL the files, even if they haven't been updated, which means > recompiling > everything. There's probably a flag to avoid that, but it hasn't been > enough of an issue to go digging through the manpage. rsync -azv is what we use: -a is the 'archive' flag and preserves date / time stamps so that files that haven't changed, don't get copied across. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: MachII Speed (was RE: Mach II)
On Wednesday, Jul 16, 2003, at 07:10 US/Pacific, Haggerty, Mike wrote: > 1) Speed. Each page took > 700 ms to generate with debugging off. This > was > using a slow server: Apache / XP / RedSky / Celeron 733 with 512 MB > RAM. As Zac points out, that's because the out-of-the-box index page creates the framework objects on every request. The code also (I believe) re-parses the XML in several places during each request. That sort of stuff will be resolved as Mach II nears release - and it will almost certainly require Red Sky (because of the page context bug, mainly). > 2) Layouts are not part of MachII yet. Or am I missing something? You can use the plugin architecture to handle layouts. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Interface Assessment
you sent localhost man. - Original Message - From: "Chunshen (Don) Li" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:27 PM Subject: Interface Assessment > Thank you very much. The links are very interesting. Also, if you wouldn't mind taking another look at URL, > http://localhost/datadata/DataMan.cfm > to see if the Interface has improved a bit, > initially I had the lazy notion that technical people don't care that much about how things look if it's used by themselves (that's what the above URL's intended audiences are) but after giving it another thought I think that notion might be away from truth. We all like things look nice, good even if I'm ugly :) > > > >> >The most popular (or so it seems) right now is UML (Unified Modeling > >> >Language). > >> Years ago, at BlueCross & BlueShield, I was taught to use Use Case (UC) > >> methodology but I guess UML is gaining ground. > >> > > >> >In UML you start "Top down". You first assign roles to each > >> participating > >> >user or system (these are "Actors") and then model, in increasing more > >> >detail, how these actors interact. > >> Sounds similar to UC. > > > >I'm not sure if they are different - Use Cases are a MAJOR aspect of UML. I > >would bet that the UC you learned is a subset or an ancestor of UML. UML is > >really a flow of many processes - different tools at different phases. Use > >Cases are primarily done in the early, discovery phase (Use Cases represent > >the possible actions/paths of the actors). > > > >I was "raised" on Summit-D which is OKAy, but focuses much, much more on > >documentation than process. We claim to use UML at Met, but it's a partial > >implementation at best. > > > >> >I think what you mean by "Interface Assessment" is what we called > >> "Usability > >> >Inventory" - an after the fact usability review. These are good if you > >> >failed to do usability during the project cycle, but are by their nature > >> >attempts to fix something rather than build it correctly the first time. > >> I was alerted to a potential project essentially called "XYZ Interface > >> Assessment", and this XYZ may very well be a legency system/application. > > > >It's probably the same thing. The basic idea is just going through an > >existing site/package/tool/whatever and making usability focused comments. > >I've heard many different names - but the results are pretty much all the > >same. > > > >> I agree it's never enough to stress the importance of usability through > >> project phases. Probably, application or system may be more > >> representative than "site" since the former could cover legency system as > >> well. > > > >More than that - the same (or at least very similair) skills are used in > >industrial human factors work as well: where do you put the radio knobs in > >car? What shape should they be? Where should the doors of a hotel be > >located in relation to the front desk? Pretty much everything you touch has > >had (or could damn well use!) usability work done on it. > > > >One of the better books on the subject is "The Design of Useful Things" - > >pretty light reading, but totally engrossing. > > > >I've got a bunch of my favorite links here: > > > >http://www.depressedpress.com/DepressedPress/Content/WebDesign/Resources/In d > >ex.cfm > > > >Jim Davis > > > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Cons to Fusebox
On Wednesday, Jul 16, 2003, at 11:20 US/Pacific, Michael T. Tangorre wrote: > Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or > Fusebox in general. > I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased > results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for > some cons as I have a decent list of pros. Have a read of: http://www.corfield.org/index.php?fuseaction=fusebox.main I'm not exactly a fan of FB - I've been *very* critical of it (and some of its proponents!) in the past but, as you can see from the URL, I rewrote my personal site using FB3/PHP for the experience, and wrote that up too. FB4 is a nice refinement of FB3, replacing the various CF infrastructure files (that you had to modify every time you changed anything) with a simple, clean XML file, as well as adding a plugin system. I haven't spent much time looking at it but there's some clever stuff in there (including the parsing and compilation of the XML down to CF code I believe so that 'production mode' is much faster). Mach II (nee Fusebox MX) is a radically different beast and also worth looking at. I've started a fledgling area about it and will be building a version of my site using Mach II soon (no idea where I'll deploy it yet! :) http://www.corfield.org/index.php?fuseaction=machii.main Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Cons to Fusebox
Not that I would normally jump in to defend FB but... On Wednesday, Jul 16, 2003, at 12:06 US/Pacific, Barney Boisvert wrote: > - That horrible XML syntax for building an app. Have to learn another > language in order to use it. I have to say that XML is not much of a stretch for anyone familiar with HTML and CF and, these days, you really need to know at least the principles of XML just to get your job done properly! > - Can't put [as much] logic in the switch file (now XML), like in FB3 That's a benefit, in my opinion - it keeps the control structure much simpler and encourages you to structure your app better. Besides, FB4 subsumes FuseQ removing one of FB3's shortcomings... > - FB can make it harder to develop an app without proper planning > beforehand Yes, that's probably fair. And it's true of any framework. The benefits of using a framework are many however so it's a tradeoff. > I think FB4 provides a very nice balance between ease of use and > functionality. If you take a look at Benoit Hediard's MVCF framework > at > www.benorama.com, you'll see a totally different approach And, more to the point, FB is a *framework* whereas MVCF is not - it's a methodology instead. FB provides code that does a bunch of stuff for you, MVCF is a blueprint for your apps but doesn't give you a 'leg up' in terms of pre-built code. > My personal opinion is that FB4 having the same name as FB3 is not a > benefit > to FB4, as it has to deal with all the negative press FB3 garnered. > It's a > totally different beast. Hmm, I would agree that Mach II (nee Fusebox MX) is "a totally different beast" (to FB3) but I really do think that FB4 is just an *evolution* - you can, after all, use nearly all your fuse files from FB3 without change in FB4 (so I hear). Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Problems Duplicating a Query
I've worked at this for hours and I can't figure out why this doesn't work!
Here's the deal...
This is a function inside a cfc. I'm calling a function in another cfc that
returns a structure. One of the items in that structure is a query. I'm
trying to add 3 columns to the query using arrays and the QueryAddColumn
function. Then I make a copy of query using Duplicate(). However, when I
call for the copy in a Query of Queries I get this error:
Table named "records1SELECT" was not found in Memory. It is misspelled, or
the table is not defined.
If I comment out the three QueryAddColumn lines, it works fine! Why would
the copy work fine if the query not modified, but apparently not work if it
was?
Also, if I comment out everything from the query of queries on down and
change the function to output the original query instead of a boolean I can
see the additional columns added by the QueryAddColumns.
The entire code is listed below.
Thanks,
Jonathan
SELECT #Evaluate("IDColumn#i#")# AS ID,
#Evaluate("column#i#")# AS DisplayName, CMSUseOnlyFeatureSortOrder As
SortOrder
FROM records#i#SELECT
UNION
ORDER BY SortOrder
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in
ColdFusion and related topics.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Interface Assessment
I must have missed the first message - I never saw the interface before it improved. However you'll need to send another link - you made the same mistake that I ALWAYS do: sent a local link to public people. ;^) Jim Davis > -Original Message- > From: Chunshen (Don) Li [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:28 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Interface Assessment > > Thank you very much. The links are very interesting. Also, if you > wouldn't mind taking another look at URL, > http://localhost/datadata/DataMan.cfm > to see if the Interface has improved a bit, > initially I had the lazy notion that technical people don't care that much > about how things look if it's used by themselves (that's what the above > URL's intended audiences are) but after giving it another thought I think > that notion might be away from truth. We all like things look nice, good > even if I'm ugly :) > > > >> >The most popular (or so it seems) right now is UML (Unified Modeling > >> >Language). > >> Years ago, at BlueCross & BlueShield, I was taught to use Use Case (UC) > >> methodology but I guess UML is gaining ground. > >> > > >> >In UML you start "Top down". You first assign roles to each > >> participating > >> >user or system (these are "Actors") and then model, in increasing more > >> >detail, how these actors interact. > >> Sounds similar to UC. > > > >I'm not sure if they are different - Use Cases are a MAJOR aspect of UML. > I > >would bet that the UC you learned is a subset or an ancestor of UML. UML > is > >really a flow of many processes - different tools at different phases. > Use > >Cases are primarily done in the early, discovery phase (Use Cases > represent > >the possible actions/paths of the actors). > > > >I was "raised" on Summit-D which is OKAy, but focuses much, much more on > >documentation than process. We claim to use UML at Met, but it's a > partial > >implementation at best. > > > >> >I think what you mean by "Interface Assessment" is what we called > >> "Usability > >> >Inventory" - an after the fact usability review. These are good if > you > >> >failed to do usability during the project cycle, but are by their > nature > >> >attempts to fix something rather than build it correctly the first > time. > >> I was alerted to a potential project essentially called "XYZ Interface > >> Assessment", and this XYZ may very well be a legency > system/application. > > > >It's probably the same thing. The basic idea is just going through an > >existing site/package/tool/whatever and making usability focused > comments. > >I've heard many different names - but the results are pretty much all the > >same. > > > >> I agree it's never enough to stress the importance of usability through > >> project phases. Probably, application or system may be more > >> representative than "site" since the former could cover legency system > as > >> well. > > > >More than that - the same (or at least very similair) skills are used in > >industrial human factors work as well: where do you put the radio knobs > in > >car? What shape should they be? Where should the doors of a hotel be > >located in relation to the front desk? Pretty much everything you touch > has > >had (or could damn well use!) usability work done on it. > > > >One of the better books on the subject is "The Design of Useful Things" - > >pretty light reading, but totally engrossing. > > > >I've got a bunch of my favorite links here: > > > >http://www.depressedpress.com/DepressedPress/Content/WebDesign/Resources/ > Ind > >ex.cfm > > > >Jim Davis > > > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Interface Assessment
Thank you very much. The links are very interesting. Also, if you wouldn't mind taking another look at URL, http://localhost/datadata/DataMan.cfm to see if the Interface has improved a bit, initially I had the lazy notion that technical people don't care that much about how things look if it's used by themselves (that's what the above URL's intended audiences are) but after giving it another thought I think that notion might be away from truth. We all like things look nice, good even if I'm ugly :) >> >The most popular (or so it seems) right now is UML (Unified Modeling >> >Language). >> Years ago, at BlueCross & BlueShield, I was taught to use Use Case (UC) >> methodology but I guess UML is gaining ground. >> > >> >In UML you start "Top down". You first assign roles to each >> participating >> >user or system (these are "Actors") and then model, in increasing more >> >detail, how these actors interact. >> Sounds similar to UC. > >I'm not sure if they are different - Use Cases are a MAJOR aspect of UML. I >would bet that the UC you learned is a subset or an ancestor of UML. UML is >really a flow of many processes - different tools at different phases. Use >Cases are primarily done in the early, discovery phase (Use Cases represent >the possible actions/paths of the actors). > >I was "raised" on Summit-D which is OKAy, but focuses much, much more on >documentation than process. We claim to use UML at Met, but it's a partial >implementation at best. > >> >I think what you mean by "Interface Assessment" is what we called >> "Usability >> >Inventory" - an after the fact usability review. These are good if you >> >failed to do usability during the project cycle, but are by their nature >> >attempts to fix something rather than build it correctly the first time. >> I was alerted to a potential project essentially called "XYZ Interface >> Assessment", and this XYZ may very well be a legency system/application. > >It's probably the same thing. The basic idea is just going through an >existing site/package/tool/whatever and making usability focused comments. >I've heard many different names - but the results are pretty much all the >same. > >> I agree it's never enough to stress the importance of usability through >> project phases. Probably, application or system may be more >> representative than "site" since the former could cover legency system as >> well. > >More than that - the same (or at least very similair) skills are used in >industrial human factors work as well: where do you put the radio knobs in >car? What shape should they be? Where should the doors of a hotel be >located in relation to the front desk? Pretty much everything you touch has >had (or could damn well use!) usability work done on it. > >One of the better books on the subject is "The Design of Useful Things" - >pretty light reading, but totally engrossing. > >I've got a bunch of my favorite links here: > >http://www.depressedpress.com/DepressedPress/Content/WebDesign/Resources/Ind >ex.cfm > >Jim Davis > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: QoQ Single Quotes
You may be coming up against a known issue in CFMX... "single quotes are sometimes not
escaped in cfquery"... there's not any more detail than that (as far as I can tell) on
the known issues list, but it's slated to be fixed in Red Sky.
hth
s. isaac dealey972-490-6624
new epoch http://www.turnkey.to
lead architect, tapestry cms http://products.turnkey.to
tapestry api is opensource http://www.turnkey.to/tapi
team macromedia volunteer http://www.macromedia.com/go/team
certified advanced coldfusion 5 developer
http://www.macromedia.com/v1/handlers/index.cfm?ID=21816
> Can't seem to get Query-of-Query to work with single
> quotes...
> E.g.
> WHERE name = 'Pvc's Office'
> WHERE name = 'Pvc''s Office'
> WHERE name = '#PreserveSingleQuotes("Pvc's Office")#'
> WHERE name = cfsqltype="CF_SQL_VARCHAR">
> All don't work.
> Is this a bug in QoQ, or can anybody think of another way
> around this???
> Thanks,
> Craig
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at
http://www.coolfusion.com
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
QoQ Single Quotes
Can't seem to get Query-of-Query to work with single quotes...
E.g.
WHERE name = 'Pvc's Office'
WHERE name = 'Pvc''s Office'
WHERE name = '#PreserveSingleQuotes("Pvc's Office")#'
WHERE name =
All don't work.
Is this a bug in QoQ, or can anybody think of another way around this???
Thanks,
Craig
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at
http://www.coolfusion.com
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
CF 5.0 vs. MX
My thanks to everyone for the helpful info! I was really hoping to get mostly positive feedback and I did! I got hooked on CF at 2.0 and look forward to it getting even better! ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Interface Assessment
> >The most popular (or so it seems) right now is UML (Unified Modeling > >Language). > Years ago, at BlueCross & BlueShield, I was taught to use Use Case (UC) > methodology but I guess UML is gaining ground. > > > >In UML you start "Top down". You first assign roles to each > participating > >user or system (these are "Actors") and then model, in increasing more > >detail, how these actors interact. > Sounds similar to UC. I'm not sure if they are different - Use Cases are a MAJOR aspect of UML. I would bet that the UC you learned is a subset or an ancestor of UML. UML is really a flow of many processes - different tools at different phases. Use Cases are primarily done in the early, discovery phase (Use Cases represent the possible actions/paths of the actors). I was "raised" on Summit-D which is OKAy, but focuses much, much more on documentation than process. We claim to use UML at Met, but it's a partial implementation at best. > >I think what you mean by "Interface Assessment" is what we called > "Usability > >Inventory" - an after the fact usability review. These are good if you > >failed to do usability during the project cycle, but are by their nature > >attempts to fix something rather than build it correctly the first time. > I was alerted to a potential project essentially called "XYZ Interface > Assessment", and this XYZ may very well be a legency system/application. It's probably the same thing. The basic idea is just going through an existing site/package/tool/whatever and making usability focused comments. I've heard many different names - but the results are pretty much all the same. > I agree it's never enough to stress the importance of usability through > project phases. Probably, application or system may be more > representative than "site" since the former could cover legency system as > well. More than that - the same (or at least very similair) skills are used in industrial human factors work as well: where do you put the radio knobs in car? What shape should they be? Where should the doors of a hotel be located in relation to the front desk? Pretty much everything you touch has had (or could damn well use!) usability work done on it. One of the better books on the subject is "The Design of Useful Things" - pretty light reading, but totally engrossing. I've got a bunch of my favorite links here: http://www.depressedpress.com/DepressedPress/Content/WebDesign/Resources/Ind ex.cfm Jim Davis ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
I do use a framework, just not FB. I feel that FB adds a lot of overhead to my dev time. Now I am doing lots of RIA's with Flash and so most if not all of my current and future apps will not have an HTML interface and so I do not need FB. But, again, this is all my opinion.. ;) Clint -Original Message- From: Shawn Grover [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 8:39 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox My FB knowledge is a bit old (FB2 days), but what I remember is that FB basically provided a programming framework. For those of us that had a programming background (i.e. desktop applications), building a programming structure is/was a natural thing. On the otherhand, web developers without that programming background (i.e. they knew HTML, and are/were relatively new to scripting) would benifit from FB because it imposed structure on the applications they were creating. I know FB has evolved since those days, so maybe this view is outdated. >From what I've seen of this thread, it might be worth looking at FB >again. But now that I can build components, and basically implement OOP techniques, I don't know if FB would offer me anything that I can't already do through another method. My thoughts, not yours Shawn -Original Message- From: Clint Tredway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 6:57 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox I recently helped on a project that used Fusebox. I tell you what.. Talk about doing more than what you need. I will never understand using Fusebox. It took more time to build the parts that I needed to get done using Fusebox than it would have had I just built it the way that I do it. I know it may work for some, but for me.. I don't like it. My 2 cents... Clint -Original Message- From: GL [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 7:45 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox Right Barney. I've architected dozens of FB3 sites without ever needing to use a recursive call to the fusebox. Earlier in the thread someone mentioned that FB3 has garnered a lot of bad press. Everyone in the FB community loves FB3! I've been to most of the conferences and have been on the HOF list for a few years. In my opinion the only bad press I've heard is from overly clever folks who try to make things as complicated as possible rather than just getting the job done. FB 3 gets the job done with tons of upside. FB4 sounds like it'll be great also, but shouldn't take anything away from FB3. Greg -Original Message- From: Barney Boisvert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 7:26 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox Wow. I'm impressed. >From what I've gathered, applications making heavy use of recursive calls to the fusebox are not the norm for FB3 applications, and the performance gain you mention is tied directly to that style of coding. If you don't make use of recursive calls, you'll see a performance increase with FB4 over FB3, but it won't be nearly that substantial. I'm not beating a dead horse, just don't want to let anyone get the idea that FB4 is orders of magnitude faster for all situations. It might be for some, but not all. cheers, barneyb --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Brian Kotek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:43 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Cons to Fusebox > > > I should have been clearer, in that the application in question used > multiple CFMODULE calls to recursively call the Fusebox core and > populate several sections of content. Other than the change from FB3 > to FB4 (along with the elimination of the CFMODULEs), no other changes > were made to the application. The processing time for an average page > in this application dropped from 400 ms to 40 ms when using Fusebox 4 > in production mode (a setting in the fusebox.xml file). Obviously, > your mileage may vary, but I feel this is a pretty good example of the > increase in performance that FB4 can deliver. > > >Brian's comparison needs qualification. If a request takes > 400ms to render, > >but 350 of that was a slow query, then it'll only drop to around > 360ms with > >FB4. It's only the framework code that is enormously faster, not the > >application code. In my experiences, the framework overhead was > annoying, > >but fairly small (never more than 10-15%) of total execution > time. Assuming > >that tenfold decrease is valid (it's probably reasonable), you're > >only looking at shaving 10% off your total execution time. The point > is that FB3 > >isn't horribly slower, it's the application that takes most of > the time, not > >the framework. FB4 is has a lighter weight execution time, but > it's a small > >difference overall. > ~~
RE: Cons to Fusebox
My FB knowledge is a bit old (FB2 days), but what I remember is that FB basically provided a programming framework. For those of us that had a programming background (i.e. desktop applications), building a programming structure is/was a natural thing. On the otherhand, web developers without that programming background (i.e. they knew HTML, and are/were relatively new to scripting) would benifit from FB because it imposed structure on the applications they were creating. I know FB has evolved since those days, so maybe this view is outdated. >From what I've seen of this thread, it might be worth looking at FB again. But now that I can build components, and basically implement OOP techniques, I don't know if FB would offer me anything that I can't already do through another method. My thoughts, not yours Shawn -Original Message- From: Clint Tredway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 6:57 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox I recently helped on a project that used Fusebox. I tell you what.. Talk about doing more than what you need. I will never understand using Fusebox. It took more time to build the parts that I needed to get done using Fusebox than it would have had I just built it the way that I do it. I know it may work for some, but for me.. I don't like it. My 2 cents... Clint -Original Message- From: GL [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 7:45 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox Right Barney. I've architected dozens of FB3 sites without ever needing to use a recursive call to the fusebox. Earlier in the thread someone mentioned that FB3 has garnered a lot of bad press. Everyone in the FB community loves FB3! I've been to most of the conferences and have been on the HOF list for a few years. In my opinion the only bad press I've heard is from overly clever folks who try to make things as complicated as possible rather than just getting the job done. FB 3 gets the job done with tons of upside. FB4 sounds like it'll be great also, but shouldn't take anything away from FB3. Greg -Original Message- From: Barney Boisvert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 7:26 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox Wow. I'm impressed. >From what I've gathered, applications making heavy use of recursive calls to the fusebox are not the norm for FB3 applications, and the performance gain you mention is tied directly to that style of coding. If you don't make use of recursive calls, you'll see a performance increase with FB4 over FB3, but it won't be nearly that substantial. I'm not beating a dead horse, just don't want to let anyone get the idea that FB4 is orders of magnitude faster for all situations. It might be for some, but not all. cheers, barneyb --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Brian Kotek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:43 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Cons to Fusebox > > > I should have been clearer, in that the application in question used > multiple CFMODULE calls to recursively call the Fusebox core and > populate several sections of content. Other than the change from FB3 > to FB4 (along with the elimination of the CFMODULEs), no other changes > were made to the application. The processing time for an average page > in this application dropped from 400 ms to 40 ms when using Fusebox 4 > in production mode (a setting in the fusebox.xml file). Obviously, > your mileage may vary, but I feel this is a pretty good example of the > increase in performance that FB4 can deliver. > > >Brian's comparison needs qualification. If a request takes > 400ms to render, > >but 350 of that was a slow query, then it'll only drop to around > 360ms with > >FB4. It's only the framework code that is enormously faster, not the > >application code. In my experiences, the framework overhead was > annoying, > >but fairly small (never more than 10-15%) of total execution > time. Assuming > >that tenfold decrease is valid (it's probably reasonable), you're > >only looking at shaving 10% off your total execution time. The point > is that FB3 > >isn't horribly slower, it's the application that takes most of > the time, not > >the framework. FB4 is has a lighter weight execution time, but > it's a small > >difference overall. > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.h
RE: Macromedia Updates Contribute
Funny thing is, I blogged almost that exact sentiment earlier today. :) http://blog.pengoworks.com/blogger/index.cfm?action=blog:240 -Dan > -Original Message- > From: Stacy Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:28 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Macromedia Updates Contribute > > Unfortunately that may discourage only a small percentage of users from > using prated versions...and perhaps the casual friend-to-friend > "donation" scenario...because rest assured this new protection will be > cracked by the Pirates of the Caribbean! Arrggghhh matey! > > Makes you wonder if it's worth the effort...but I'm sure they've > crunched the numbers... > > Stace > > > -Original Message- > From: Chris Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:11 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: OT: Macromedia Updates Contribute > > http://news.com.com/2100-1012-1026181.html?part=dtx&tag=nhl > > Some snippets from the article: > > "Macromedia plans to update its light-duty Web publishing application, > adding support for the Mac operating system and integrating > controversial antipiracy technology." > > ... > > "The new version will be the first Macromedia product to use "product > activation," an increasingly common antipiracy technique in which the > installation process for a piece of software ties that copy to a > particular PC configuration." > > ... > > "Erik Larson, senior product manager for Macromedia, said activation > technology in Contribute 2 will be based on software by Macrovision, the > same company that supplied Intuit. But Macromedia's version will be > heavily customized to allow for installation on two PCs and to be > forgiving of hardware changes. > > Larson said use of product activation in other Macromedia products will > be guided by comments from Contribute owners. "We wanted to get a wide > range of feedback about activation," he said. Contribute "spans two sets > of customers, so we thought it would be a good example." " > > Interesting... > > -- > Chris Montgomery > Airtight Web Services http://www.airtightweb.com > Web Development, Web Project Management, Software Sales > 210-490-2415 > AIM: Airtightweb > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
It was FB3 and this was the first 'official' project that I had used it but I had used it on my to see if it was something that I wanted to use. I found that it wasn't. In a nutshell, I don't like having all my files going through a switch and having a to add a case statement every time I add a section. There are too many things for me to list here that I don't like and that drove me nuts while working on that project. I have been using CF since 3.11 and just have found FB3 or any FB version for that matter too much work to get the job done. This is all my opinion as I have seen that it works for some... Just not me. Clint -Original Message- From: Brian Kotek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 8:07 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Cons to Fusebox Could you be more detailed, Clint? What exactly took so long? How was it 'more than you needed'? What version of Fusebox was used? How much experience have you had with it? I've been using Fusebox for years, and CF since version 3, and I've had much different results with Fusebox. Not only does it make things a whole lot easier, but when you are working on a team and you all know Fusebox, the productivity can be amazing. >I recently helped on a project that used Fusebox. I tell you what.. >Talk about doing more than what you need. I will never understand using >Fusebox. It took more time to build the parts that I needed to get done >using Fusebox than it would have had I just built it the way that I do >it. > >I know it may work for some, but for me.. I don't like it. > >My 2 cents... > >Clint ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Cons to Fusebox
Could you be more detailed, Clint? What exactly took so long? How was it 'more than you needed'? What version of Fusebox was used? How much experience have you had with it? I've been using Fusebox for years, and CF since version 3, and I've had much different results with Fusebox. Not only does it make things a whole lot easier, but when you are working on a team and you all know Fusebox, the productivity can be amazing. >I recently helped on a project that used Fusebox. I tell you what.. Talk >about doing more than what you need. I will never understand using >Fusebox. It took more time to build the parts that I needed to get done >using Fusebox than it would have had I just built it the way that I do >it. > >I know it may work for some, but for me.. I don't like it. > >My 2 cents... > >Clint ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
I recently helped on a project that used Fusebox. I tell you what.. Talk about doing more than what you need. I will never understand using Fusebox. It took more time to build the parts that I needed to get done using Fusebox than it would have had I just built it the way that I do it. I know it may work for some, but for me.. I don't like it. My 2 cents... Clint -Original Message- From: GL [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 7:45 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox Right Barney. I've architected dozens of FB3 sites without ever needing to use a recursive call to the fusebox. Earlier in the thread someone mentioned that FB3 has garnered a lot of bad press. Everyone in the FB community loves FB3! I've been to most of the conferences and have been on the HOF list for a few years. In my opinion the only bad press I've heard is from overly clever folks who try to make things as complicated as possible rather than just getting the job done. FB 3 gets the job done with tons of upside. FB4 sounds like it'll be great also, but shouldn't take anything away from FB3. Greg -Original Message- From: Barney Boisvert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 7:26 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox Wow. I'm impressed. >From what I've gathered, applications making heavy use of recursive calls to the fusebox are not the norm for FB3 applications, and the performance gain you mention is tied directly to that style of coding. If you don't make use of recursive calls, you'll see a performance increase with FB4 over FB3, but it won't be nearly that substantial. I'm not beating a dead horse, just don't want to let anyone get the idea that FB4 is orders of magnitude faster for all situations. It might be for some, but not all. cheers, barneyb --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Brian Kotek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:43 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Cons to Fusebox > > > I should have been clearer, in that the application in question used > multiple CFMODULE calls to recursively call the Fusebox core and > populate several sections of content. Other than the change from FB3 > to FB4 (along with the elimination of the CFMODULEs), no other changes > were made to the application. The processing time for an average page > in this application dropped from 400 ms to 40 ms when using Fusebox 4 > in production mode (a setting in the fusebox.xml file). Obviously, > your mileage may vary, but I feel this is a pretty good example of the > increase in performance that FB4 can deliver. > > >Brian's comparison needs qualification. If a request takes > 400ms to render, > >but 350 of that was a slow query, then it'll only drop to around > 360ms with > >FB4. It's only the framework code that is enormously faster, not the > >application code. In my experiences, the framework overhead was > annoying, > >but fairly small (never more than 10-15%) of total execution > time. Assuming > >that tenfold decrease is valid (it's probably reasonable), you're > >only looking at shaving 10% off your total execution time. The point > is that FB3 > >isn't horribly slower, it's the application that takes most of > the time, not > >the framework. FB4 is has a lighter weight execution time, but > it's a small > >difference overall. > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
Right Barney. I've architected dozens of FB3 sites without ever needing to use a recursive call to the fusebox. Earlier in the thread someone mentioned that FB3 has garnered a lot of bad press. Everyone in the FB community loves FB3! I've been to most of the conferences and have been on the HOF list for a few years. In my opinion the only bad press I've heard is from overly clever folks who try to make things as complicated as possible rather than just getting the job done. FB 3 gets the job done with tons of upside. FB4 sounds like it'll be great also, but shouldn't take anything away from FB3. Greg -Original Message- From: Barney Boisvert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 7:26 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox Wow. I'm impressed. >From what I've gathered, applications making heavy use of recursive calls to the fusebox are not the norm for FB3 applications, and the performance gain you mention is tied directly to that style of coding. If you don't make use of recursive calls, you'll see a performance increase with FB4 over FB3, but it won't be nearly that substantial. I'm not beating a dead horse, just don't want to let anyone get the idea that FB4 is orders of magnitude faster for all situations. It might be for some, but not all. cheers, barneyb --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Brian Kotek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:43 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Cons to Fusebox > > > I should have been clearer, in that the application in question used > multiple CFMODULE calls to recursively call the Fusebox core and > populate several sections of content. Other than the change from FB3 > to FB4 (along with the elimination of the CFMODULEs), no other changes > were made to the application. The processing time for an average page > in this application dropped from 400 ms to 40 ms when using Fusebox 4 > in production mode (a setting in the fusebox.xml file). Obviously, > your mileage may vary, but I feel this is a pretty good example of the > increase in performance that FB4 can deliver. > > >Brian's comparison needs qualification. If a request takes > 400ms to render, > >but 350 of that was a slow query, then it'll only drop to around > 360ms with > >FB4. It's only the framework code that is enormously faster, not the > >application code. In my experiences, the framework overhead was > annoying, > >but fairly small (never more than 10-15%) of total execution > time. Assuming > >that tenfold decrease is valid (it's probably reasonable), you're > >only looking at shaving 10% off your total execution time. The point > is that FB3 > >isn't horribly slower, it's the application that takes most of > the time, not > >the framework. FB4 is has a lighter weight execution time, but > it's a small > >difference overall. > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Using relative links in a common header
set an application variable that stores the absolute URI to the root of your site. If you're hosted on a domain name, it'll be "/". if you're in the 'myapp' directory, it'll be "/myapp/". Make sure that the first and last character are both '/', or it won't work right. You'll have to ensure that you set the variable to the appropriate value if you change the configuration of the server. Then use that variable in all your references to external resources: If you don't want to have to remember to set that variable when you move you application, you can write some code that uses the cgi.script_name variable to compute the proper value for you, but doing it is potentially tricky, depending on how your application templates are layed out across directories. HTH, barneyb --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Jim McAtee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:24 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Using relative links in a common header > > > I've got a small app with a directory structure something like > the following: > > / > /catalog > /css > /maint > /products > /orders > /images > /includes > > Within /includes I have common header and footer files, with the header > containing (simplified): > > > > Application_Name > > > > and this is just included in the template using > > or > or > > > depending on where in the directory tree the template resides. I > want to place > a relative reference in this header to a style sheet contained in the /css > directory. > > > > Application Name > > > > > How do I construct the href in the tag to work > independently of where > the template is within the directory tree? I want to be able to take this > whole app and to be able to place it anwhere in an existing web > directory tree > without modification, so I can't use absolute referencing to the > style sheet, > unless the link were dynamically generated by CF. > > Thanks, > Jim > > > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
Wow. I'm impressed. >From what I've gathered, applications making heavy use of recursive calls to the fusebox are not the norm for FB3 applications, and the performance gain you mention is tied directly to that style of coding. If you don't make use of recursive calls, you'll see a performance increase with FB4 over FB3, but it won't be nearly that substantial. I'm not beating a dead horse, just don't want to let anyone get the idea that FB4 is orders of magnitude faster for all situations. It might be for some, but not all. cheers, barneyb --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Brian Kotek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:43 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Cons to Fusebox > > > I should have been clearer, in that the application in question > used multiple CFMODULE calls to recursively call the Fusebox core > and populate several sections of content. Other than the change > from FB3 to FB4 (along with the elimination of the CFMODULEs), no > other changes were made to the application. The processing time > for an average page in this application dropped from 400 ms to 40 > ms when using Fusebox 4 in production mode (a setting in the > fusebox.xml file). Obviously, your mileage may vary, but I feel > this is a pretty good example of the increase in performance that > FB4 can deliver. > > >Brian's comparison needs qualification. If a request takes > 400ms to render, > >but 350 of that was a slow query, then it'll only drop to around > 360ms with > >FB4. It's only the framework code that is enormously faster, not the > >application code. In my experiences, the framework overhead was > annoying, > >but fairly small (never more than 10-15%) of total execution > time. Assuming > >that tenfold decrease is valid (it's probably reasonable), you're only > >looking at shaving 10% off your total execution time. The point > is that FB3 > >isn't horribly slower, it's the application that takes most of > the time, not > >the framework. FB4 is has a lighter weight execution time, but > it's a small > >difference overall. > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Using relative links in a common header
I've got a small app with a directory structure something like the following: / /catalog /css /maint /products /orders /images /includes Within /includes I have common header and footer files, with the header containing (simplified): Application_Name and this is just included in the template using or or depending on where in the directory tree the template resides. I want to place a relative reference in this header to a style sheet contained in the /css directory. Application Name How do I construct the href in the tag to work independently of where the template is within the directory tree? I want to be able to take this whole app and to be able to place it anwhere in an existing web directory tree without modification, so I can't use absolute referencing to the style sheet, unless the link were dynamically generated by CF. Thanks, Jim ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Interface Assessment
Thank you very much indeed for your thoughtful input. Some comments below. >> Hi, >> >> The subject matter is new to me and I'll make it short >> and "sweet?". So, I'll just throw out something raw, >> and pls help me to chew it. >> Major premise: I think it's more about Interface >> Usability Assessment, rather than functionality >> assessment. >> >> The way to tackle it is first to decompose all the >> components of the Interface, then each screen under >> each component. Question, would compoment A weigh more >> than component B? Would screen A weigh more than >> screen B? Yes? depending on each's contribution to >> system/application functionality? Consult with the >> client as well? What's the usual practice here? > >Usability developer's that don't consult with the END USERS (which may or >often may not be the client) will have problems. Your main source of >information concerning applicability and usability are the people using the >thing. Ignore them at your peril! > >There are several methodologies for development - any good one will include >usability as a required aspect. > >The most popular (or so it seems) right now is UML (Unified Modeling >Language). Years ago, at BlueCross & BlueShield, I was taught to use Use Case (UC) methodology but I guess UML is gaining ground. > >In UML you start "Top down". You first assign roles to each participating >user or system (these are "Actors") and then model, in increasing more >detail, how these actors interact. Sounds similar to UC. > >The key is that you're moving regularly and cleanly for less detail to more >and that all documentation builds from that which came before. The problem >that I see is that most companies only use parts of UML - "Business" takes >on the role of usability consultant and designer - this is wrong. > >At first you have vague notions of what you need: "I want a website to sell >movie tickets". You define your actors: Theaters, MovieGoers, etc. For >each actor you define properties and tasks: a Moviegoer has a name andcan >buy a ticket, a Theater has a number of available seats and can sell a >ticket. > >At this point usability work starts. What does a moviegoer want? They want >to find movies and buy tickets. How do they want to find movies? They want >to search by location, title, star, etc. > >You get all this information via usability/discovery techniques: >interviewing moviegoers, roleplaying (among the developers), industry >research/information, focus groups and so forth. > >Then, as your developer's are continuing down the technical path (database >design, security, etc) your usability people are creating prototypes. These >prototypes are tested, refined, tested, refined until you're happy. > >Now the actual functionality (both teams of course are communicating >constantly) is bolted on to the interface. The interface is then usability >tested again (and maybe again and again) for performance, response, and >expectation. > >Throughout the latter part of this phase visual designers have been working >hard as well: they're designs enliven the system and give it the emotional >presentation required by the client. These are also tested (focus groups or >surveys are common tools for this). > >> Secondly, what's the value of Interface Assessment if >> it is done without correlation to Functionality >> Assessment? A nice-looking house built on sand won't >> stand. > >I think what you mean by "Interface Assessment" is what we called "Usability >Inventory" - an after the fact usability review. These are good if you >failed to do usability during the project cycle, but are by their nature >attempts to fix something rather than build it correctly the first time. I was alerted to a potential project essentially called "XYZ Interface Assessment", and this XYZ may very well be a legency system/application. > >Everything grows from the ground. A bad architecture can result in bad >coding. Bad coding can lead to bad usability. Bad Visual design can lead >to bad usability and so on. > >If a site is written badly (is slow, prone to errors, etc) or looks badly >then it's harder to use: thus it has poor usability. You really can't build >a "nice-looking house on sand" since the fact that the house is built on >sand will cause it to look badly (to really stretch the metaphor). Yes and No. If the house's builing material is real, man, the house simply can't be built on that foundation otherwise possible. > >Usability encompasses all aspects of how a site looks, "feels", reacts and >works. > >Usability needs to be considered throughout the project development, as soon >as possible. Otherwise it's just a tacked-on aside (and very often when >usability is done last, in isolation, it's impossible to make needed >changes). > >All too often this is the case: a site is built then, right before launch, a >"UI Guy" gets to do a review. At that point it's really too late to fix >many things. I agree it's never enough
Cons to Fusebox
I should have been clearer, in that the application in question used multiple CFMODULE calls to recursively call the Fusebox core and populate several sections of content. Other than the change from FB3 to FB4 (along with the elimination of the CFMODULEs), no other changes were made to the application. The processing time for an average page in this application dropped from 400 ms to 40 ms when using Fusebox 4 in production mode (a setting in the fusebox.xml file). Obviously, your mileage may vary, but I feel this is a pretty good example of the increase in performance that FB4 can deliver. >Brian's comparison needs qualification. If a request takes 400ms to render, >but 350 of that was a slow query, then it'll only drop to around 360ms with >FB4. It's only the framework code that is enormously faster, not the >application code. In my experiences, the framework overhead was annoying, >but fairly small (never more than 10-15%) of total execution time. Assuming >that tenfold decrease is valid (it's probably reasonable), you're only >looking at shaving 10% off your total execution time. The point is that FB3 >isn't horribly slower, it's the application that takes most of the time, not >the framework. FB4 is has a lighter weight execution time, but it's a small >difference overall. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
OT sql question (xp_cmdshell)
Hello All,
I'm trying to use xp_cmdshell to run a dts job. This is what I have:
exec master..xp_cmdshell "DTSRun /S ServerName /U Username /P Password /N
[Load pr_Labor Table]"
but getting this error:
Error string: The specified DTS Package ('Name = '[Load pr_Labor Table]';
ID.VersionID = {[not specified]}.{[not specified]}') does not exist.
Any ideas?
Also.. how would I add a global parameter to that call?
Thanks!
Tim
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in
ColdFusion and related topics.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Interface Assessment
> Hi, > > The subject matter is new to me and I'll make it short > and "sweet?". So, I'll just throw out something raw, > and pls help me to chew it. > Major premise: I think it's more about Interface > Usability Assessment, rather than functionality > assessment. > > The way to tackle it is first to decompose all the > components of the Interface, then each screen under > each component. Question, would compoment A weigh more > than component B? Would screen A weigh more than > screen B? Yes? depending on each's contribution to > system/application functionality? Consult with the > client as well? What's the usual practice here? Usability developer's that don't consult with the END USERS (which may or often may not be the client) will have problems. Your main source of information concerning applicability and usability are the people using the thing. Ignore them at your peril! There are several methodologies for development - any good one will include usability as a required aspect. The most popular (or so it seems) right now is UML (Unified Modeling Language). In UML you start "Top down". You first assign roles to each participating user or system (these are "Actors") and then model, in increasing more detail, how these actors interact. The key is that you're moving regularly and cleanly for less detail to more and that all documentation builds from that which came before. The problem that I see is that most companies only use parts of UML - "Business" takes on the role of usability consultant and designer - this is wrong. At first you have vague notions of what you need: "I want a website to sell movie tickets". You define your actors: Theaters, MovieGoers, etc. For each actor you define properties and tasks: a Moviegoer has a name andcan buy a ticket, a Theater has a number of available seats and can sell a ticket. At this point usability work starts. What does a moviegoer want? They want to find movies and buy tickets. How do they want to find movies? They want to search by location, title, star, etc. You get all this information via usability/discovery techniques: interviewing moviegoers, roleplaying (among the developers), industry research/information, focus groups and so forth. Then, as your developer's are continuing down the technical path (database design, security, etc) your usability people are creating prototypes. These prototypes are tested, refined, tested, refined until you're happy. Now the actual functionality (both teams of course are communicating constantly) is bolted on to the interface. The interface is then usability tested again (and maybe again and again) for performance, response, and expectation. Throughout the latter part of this phase visual designers have been working hard as well: they're designs enliven the system and give it the emotional presentation required by the client. These are also tested (focus groups or surveys are common tools for this). > Secondly, what's the value of Interface Assessment if > it is done without correlation to Functionality > Assessment? A nice-looking house built on sand won't > stand. I think what you mean by "Interface Assessment" is what we called "Usability Inventory" - an after the fact usability review. These are good if you failed to do usability during the project cycle, but are by their nature attempts to fix something rather than build it correctly the first time. Everything grows from the ground. A bad architecture can result in bad coding. Bad coding can lead to bad usability. Bad Visual design can lead to bad usability and so on. If a site is written badly (is slow, prone to errors, etc) or looks badly then it's harder to use: thus it has poor usability. You really can't build a "nice-looking house on sand" since the fact that the house is built on sand will cause it to look badly (to really stretch the metaphor). Usability encompasses all aspects of how a site looks, "feels", reacts and works. Usability needs to be considered throughout the project development, as soon as possible. Otherwise it's just a tacked-on aside (and very often when usability is done last, in isolation, it's impossible to make needed changes). All too often this is the case: a site is built then, right before launch, a "UI Guy" gets to do a review. At that point it's really too late to fix many things. Jim Davis ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Anyone looked at MM Breeze?
Looks awesome...except when I checked the price tag ($90K USD). Yikes! Obviously this product is tailored for 500+ employees at the minimum. There has to be some way for you MM folks to shrink that down to a smaller offering. I'm getting flashbacks of Spectra pricing here! ;-) Stace AVIS IMPORTANT: --- Les informations contenues dans le present document et ses pieces jointes sont strictement confidentielles et reservees a l'usage de la (des) personne(s) a qui il est adresse. Si vous n'etes pas le destinataire, soyez avise que toute divulgation, distribution, copie, ou autre utilisation de ces informations est strictement prohibee. Si vous avez recu ce document par erreur, veuillez s'il vous plait communiquer immediatement avec l'expediteur et detruire ce document sans en faire de copie sous quelque forme. WARNING: --- The information contained in this document and attachments is confidential and intended only for the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any other use of the information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this document by mistake, please notify the sender immediately and destroy this document and attachments without making any copy of any kind. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: CF And Quick Books
Integration with the Online Edition, we can talk. Offline versions, not so much. Regards, Eric J. Hoffman Datastream Connexion -Original Message- From: Harold Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:39 PM To: CF-Talk Has anyone ever used CF and Quick Books together? If so, can you please contact me off list to let me know how you made it work. TIA ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Cons to Fusebox - hey shayna
We are using FB 3 and all the programs are in their own circuits. There also are 'component' circuits, such as ones that draw drop-down lookups and program driven menus. Using cfincludes would potentially fester one big spagetti mess; lack of encaplsation, blah blah (cfinclude vs. cfmodule, peformance vs. code read-ability and maintain-ability) that's another debate which can go either way depending on whom you talk to. Nick Han >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/16/03 01:46PM >>> *waving* Hi Nick. Yes Nick, but I know your site and unless it has changed that much in the past year and a half, it was a FB2 site that incorporated a lot of no no's (such as display code in the switch). In Fb4 you don't need to use the CFModule, just throw another Fuseaction into the Queue, also with the parsed files (compile per se), the core files don't load themselves mostly unless you are in development, or a parsed file doesn't exist for some reason. FB4 is much much faster then FB3. >We have a fairly large site, and we have begun to componentize a lot >of the web controls such as select drop-down lists, partial displays, >and any other functions that are useable. All these components are >being called by cfmodule routed back through the index (core file), >since they are organized in separate circuits. So on a large dsp page, >we could have as much as 5 to 10 cfmodule calls, pulling displays, >menus, and other web controls components. The overhead of the core >file is now noticeable. > >We're using cf5. > > >Nick Han > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/16/03 11:20AM >>> >Hey everyone, > >Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or >Fusebox in general. >I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased >results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for >some cons as I have a decent list of pros. > >Thanks, > >Mike ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
http://beta.fusebox.org -Original Message- From: Matt Robertson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:03 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Cons to Fusebox Thx to Brian and Barney both, It just seems that lately there's been a lot of talk about FB3 performance issues, and the growing impression I was getting was that it was a dog, which hasn't really been something I've seen discussed a lot until fairly recently. Maybe its the excitement building over the next release. Your two posts put this into perspective. Er... its been posted before I know, but does anyone have a link to the FB4 beta files? Its publicly available somewhere, isn't it? -- --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: jrunscripts
Thanks, so it would be correct to say that, if a particular site does not use servlets, or flash remoting, the JRunScripts virtual directory is not needed? Ironically, your blog is #3 on google for "jrunscripts servlet" :) -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wednesday, July 16, 2003, 5:17:25 PM, you wrote: DGSI> Jon, >> Is the purpose of the JRunScripts virtual directory in IIS only for >> Flash Remoting? DGSI> You'll need it in order to run servlets under CFMX as well. DGSI> - Dan DGSI> ... DGSI> : Name: Dan G. Switzer, II: DGSI> : E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : DGSI> : Blog: http://blog.pengoworks.com/ : DGSI> :...: DGSI> ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: The Access .LDB file that will not die
- Original Message - From: "Dan Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:06 PM Subject: RE: The Access .LDB file that will not die > You can disable the DB connection in the Administrator, then delete the > ldb file, then re-enable the DSN. To make sure those don't pop up > again, uncheck the box that says "Maintain database connections" in the > CF administrator for that DSN. Dan. I recreated an ODBC DSN in the CF Administrator, unchecked "Maintain database connections" and as soon as CF did a verify on the DSN, the lock file vanished. Thanks! ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Macromedia Updates Contribute
Unfortunately that may discourage only a small percentage of users from using prated versions...and perhaps the casual friend-to-friend "donation" scenario...because rest assured this new protection will be cracked by the Pirates of the Caribbean! Arrggghhh matey! Makes you wonder if it's worth the effort...but I'm sure they've crunched the numbers... Stace -Original Message- From: Chris Montgomery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:11 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: OT: Macromedia Updates Contribute http://news.com.com/2100-1012-1026181.html?part=dtx&tag=nhl Some snippets from the article: "Macromedia plans to update its light-duty Web publishing application, adding support for the Mac operating system and integrating controversial antipiracy technology." ... "The new version will be the first Macromedia product to use "product activation," an increasingly common antipiracy technique in which the installation process for a piece of software ties that copy to a particular PC configuration." ... "Erik Larson, senior product manager for Macromedia, said activation technology in Contribute 2 will be based on software by Macrovision, the same company that supplied Intuit. But Macromedia's version will be heavily customized to allow for installation on two PCs and to be forgiving of hardware changes. Larson said use of product activation in other Macromedia products will be guided by comments from Contribute owners. "We wanted to get a wide range of feedback about activation," he said. Contribute "spans two sets of customers, so we thought it would be a good example." " Interesting... -- Chris Montgomery Airtight Web Services http://www.airtightweb.com Web Development, Web Project Management, Software Sales 210-490-2415 AIM: Airtightweb ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Macromedia Updates Contribute
FYI, you can find more info at: Activation Site http://www.macromedia.com/software/activation/ FAQ http://www.macromedia.com/software/activation/faq/ Activation Demo / tour http://www.macromedia.com/software/activation/tour/ Technical Whitepaper (describes what activation is actually doing) http://www.macromedia.com/software/activation/whitepapers/ Security and Privacy Audit http://www.macromedia.com/software/activation/audit/ mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Chris Montgomery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:10 PM Subject: OT: Macromedia Updates Contribute > http://news.com.com/2100-1012-1026181.html?part=dtx&tag=nhl > > Some snippets from the article: > > "Macromedia plans to update its light-duty Web publishing application, > adding support for the Mac operating system and integrating > controversial antipiracy technology." > > ... > > "The new version will be the first Macromedia product to use "product > activation," an increasingly common antipiracy technique in which the > installation process for a piece of software ties that copy to a > particular PC configuration." > > ... > > "Erik Larson, senior product manager for Macromedia, said activation > technology in Contribute 2 will be based on software by Macrovision, the > same company that supplied Intuit. But Macromedia's version will be > heavily customized to allow for installation on two PCs and to be > forgiving of hardware changes. > > Larson said use of product activation in other Macromedia products will > be guided by comments from Contribute owners. "We wanted to get a wide > range of feedback about activation," he said. Contribute "spans two sets > of customers, so we thought it would be a good example." " > > Interesting... > > -- > Chris Montgomery > Airtight Web Services http://www.airtightweb.com > Web Development, Web Project Management, Software Sales > 210-490-2415 > AIM: Airtightweb > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: OT: Macromedia Updates Contribute
Sigh... That which can be run, can be cracked... Ah well. There's always Astalavista. - Original Message - From: Chris Montgomery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:10 pm Subject: OT: Macromedia Updates Contribute > http://news.com.com/2100-1012-1026181.html?part=dtx&tag=nhl > > Some snippets from the article: > > "Macromedia plans to update its light-duty Web publishing application, > adding support for the Mac operating system and integrating > controversial antipiracy technology." > > ... > > "The new version will be the first Macromedia product to use "product > activation," an increasingly common antipiracy technique in which the > installation process for a piece of software ties that copy to a > particular PC configuration." > > ... > > "Erik Larson, senior product manager for Macromedia, said activation > technology in Contribute 2 will be based on software by > Macrovision, the > same company that supplied Intuit. But Macromedia's version will be > heavily customized to allow for installation on two PCs and to be > forgiving of hardware changes. > > Larson said use of product activation in other Macromedia products > willbe guided by comments from Contribute owners. "We wanted to > get a wide > range of feedback about activation," he said. Contribute "spans > two sets > of customers, so we thought it would be a good example." " > > Interesting... > > -- > Chris Montgomery > Airtight Web Services http://www.airtightweb.com > Web Development, Web Project Management, Software Sales > 210-490-2415 > AIM: Airtightweb > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
Just promotional talk. Much like when a new release of CF comes out it's now, "much faster than the old, slow CF5". Yet when CF5 was released it was FAR faster than CF 4.5...etc...etc ;-) As Barney pointed out the overhead has always been negligible for just about all users of the frameworkFB4 will just be quicker is all... Yes, mach-ii looks sweet. Cheers, Stace -Original Message- From: Matt Robertson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:03 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Cons to Fusebox Thx to Brian and Barney both, It just seems that lately there's been a lot of talk about FB3 performance issues, and the growing impression I was getting was that it was a dog, which hasn't really been something I've seen discussed a lot until fairly recently. Maybe its the excitement building over the next release. Your two posts put this into perspective. Er... its been posted before I know, but does anyone have a link to the FB4 beta files? Its publicly available somewhere, isn't it? -- --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: FDF creation (PDF)
Make sure the file extension is FDF
> -Original Message-
> From: Joel Blanchette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:51 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: FDF creation (PDF)
>
>
> Hey Jeff,
> I just tried your idea and t is close...When I ran the script it
> gave me the pdf with only what was inside the tag...
>
> You can view it here : http://64.42.203.147/forms/test.pdf
>
> Below is the new code
>
>
>
>
>
> %FDF-1.2
> 1 0 obj <<
> /FDF <<
> /Fields
> [
>
>
>
>
><< /T (#VarName#) /V
> (#Evaluate("VarStruct.#VarName#")#)>>
>
>
>
>
> ]
> /F (#VarStruct.PDFURL#)
> >>
> >>
> endobj
> trailer
> <>
> %%EOF
>
>
> FILE="D:\\x\\www\forms\test.pdf"
> OUTPUT="#Test#">
> http://64.42.203.147/forms/test.pdf"; ADDTOKEN="NO">
>
>
>
> ==
> Joel Blanchette
> IT and System Specialist
> Point of Impact Technologies Inc.
> Tel: (204) 989-0013
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ==
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Garza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:24 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: FDF creation (PDF)
>
>
> Basically, get rid of the CFCONTENT tag and wrap everything with a
> CFSAVECONTENT tag instead and pass the variable on to CFFILE. Then
> relocate to the newly created file on the server.
>
> HTH,
>
> Jeff Garza
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Joel Blanchette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:50 PM
> Subject: FDF creation (PDF)
>
>
> Hello All
> I have this pdf with form field inside. I am using the PDFFormFiller
> custom tag
> (http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/exchange/index.cfm#loc=en_us&view=sn1
> 31&viewName=ColdFusion%20Extension&extID=1001002)
>
> To implement the values in the pdf. Now the problem with this tag I
> that I need to save the new pdf file on the server then show it to the
> user with a redirect.
>
> What do I have to change in the code to make this happen.
>
>
>
> %FDF-1.2
> 1 0 obj <<
> /FDF <<
> /Fields
> [
>
>
>
>
> << /T (#VarName#) /V (#Evaluate("VarStruct.#VarName#")#)>>
>
>
>
>
> ]
> /F (#VarStruct.PDFURL#)
> >>
> >>
> endobj
> trailer
> <>
> %%EOF
>
>
>
>
> ==
> Joel Blanchette
> IT and System Specialist
> Point of Impact Technologies Inc.
> Tel: (204) 989-0013
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ==
>
>
>
>
>
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in
ColdFusion and related topics.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Re: Cons to Fusebox
We've never really noticed significant performance degredation in FB30. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Original Message --- Brian Kotek wrote: >Performance in Fusebox 4 is almost 10 TIMES better than Fusebox 3. In >other words, a page that took 400 milliseconds to render in Fusebox 3 >takes about 40 milliseconds to render in production mode with Fusebox 4. So what happens to all the folks who hitched up their wagons to FB3? Time for a free (i.e. unbillable) do-over? How does this reflect on the cost of implementing FB3, in retrospect? Will new-cause but similar-effect issues arise in FB4? I'm anxiously awaiting fb4's release as I very much want to give it a look. Standardization is good; disciplined code is good. Torpedoed performance and a limited lifespan after adoption is terrifying. -- --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: jrunscripts
Jon, > Is the purpose of the JRunScripts virtual directory in IIS only for > Flash Remoting? You'll need it in order to run servlets under CFMX as well. - Dan ... : Name: Dan G. Switzer, II: : E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : : Blog: http://blog.pengoworks.com/ : :...: ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: FDF creation (PDF)
You saving the file as a .pdf? don't save it as .pdf. It won't work. Your
file must be a .fdf.
That will work. I just copied and pasted your output from the site into a
file called test.fdf and it opened fine.
Cheers,
Jeff Garza
Manager, Phoenix CFUG
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Certified ColdFusion MX Developer
- Original Message -
From: "Joel Blanchette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 1:50 PM
Subject: RE: FDF creation (PDF)
Hey Jeff,
I just tried your idea and t is close...When I ran the script it
gave me the pdf with only what was inside the tag...
You can view it here : http://64.42.203.147/forms/test.pdf
Below is the new code
%FDF-1.2
1 0 obj <<
/FDF <<
/Fields
[
<< /T (#VarName#) /V
(#Evaluate("VarStruct.#VarName#")#)>>
]
/F (#VarStruct.PDFURL#)
>>
>>
endobj
trailer
<>
%%EOF
http://64.42.203.147/forms/test.pdf"; ADDTOKEN="NO">
==
Joel Blanchette
IT and System Specialist
Point of Impact Technologies Inc.
Tel: (204) 989-0013
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
==
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Garza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:24 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: FDF creation (PDF)
Basically, get rid of the CFCONTENT tag and wrap everything with a
CFSAVECONTENT tag instead and pass the variable on to CFFILE. Then
relocate to the newly created file on the server.
HTH,
Jeff Garza
- Original Message -
From: "Joel Blanchette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:50 PM
Subject: FDF creation (PDF)
Hello All
I have this pdf with form field inside. I am using the PDFFormFiller
custom tag
(http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/exchange/index.cfm#loc=en_us&view=sn1
31&viewName=ColdFusion%20Extension&extID=1001002)
To implement the values in the pdf. Now the problem with this tag I
that I need to save the new pdf file on the server then show it to the
user with a redirect.
What do I have to change in the code to make this happen.
%FDF-1.2
1 0 obj <<
/FDF <<
/Fields
[
<< /T (#VarName#) /V (#Evaluate("VarStruct.#VarName#")#)>>
]
/F (#VarStruct.PDFURL#)
>>
>>
endobj
trailer
<>
%%EOF
==
Joel Blanchette
IT and System Specialist
Point of Impact Technologies Inc.
Tel: (204) 989-0013
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ==
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in
ColdFusion and related topics.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
FACS Cache Database
Anyone out there worked with FACS or the "Cache" database it is built on? In particular, wondering if MX can connect via ODBC or some other drivers. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
OT: Macromedia Updates Contribute
http://news.com.com/2100-1012-1026181.html?part=dtx&tag=nhl Some snippets from the article: "Macromedia plans to update its light-duty Web publishing application, adding support for the Mac operating system and integrating controversial antipiracy technology." ... "The new version will be the first Macromedia product to use "product activation," an increasingly common antipiracy technique in which the installation process for a piece of software ties that copy to a particular PC configuration." ... "Erik Larson, senior product manager for Macromedia, said activation technology in Contribute 2 will be based on software by Macrovision, the same company that supplied Intuit. But Macromedia's version will be heavily customized to allow for installation on two PCs and to be forgiving of hardware changes. Larson said use of product activation in other Macromedia products will be guided by comments from Contribute owners. "We wanted to get a wide range of feedback about activation," he said. Contribute "spans two sets of customers, so we thought it would be a good example." " Interesting... -- Chris Montgomery Airtight Web Services http://www.airtightweb.com Web Development, Web Project Management, Software Sales 210-490-2415 AIM: Airtightweb ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
http://beta.fusebox.org is the place. --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Matt Robertson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 2:03 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Cons to Fusebox > > > Thx to Brian and Barney both, > > It just seems that lately there's been a lot of talk about FB3 > performance issues, and the growing impression I was getting was > that it was a dog, which hasn't really been something I've seen > discussed a lot until fairly recently. Maybe its the excitement > building over the next release. Your two posts put this into perspective. > > Er... its been posted before I know, but does anyone have a link > to the FB4 beta files? Its publicly available somewhere, isn't it? > > -- > --- > Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com > --- > > -- > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: The Access .LDB file that will not die
You can disable the DB connection in the Administrator, then delete the ldb file, then re-enable the DSN. To make sure those don't pop up again, uncheck the box that says "Maintain database connections" in the CF administrator for that DSN. Dan Phillips www.CFXHosting.com 1-866-239-4678 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:05 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: The Access .LDB file that will not die > I'm really trying to avoid rebooting the whole server and > I'm not even certain that will do it. What about cycling > IIS? I don't want to do that either unless I was fairly > certain that it might do the trick. If it was locked by CF, you'll probably have better luck cycling the CF Application Server service (assuming you're using CF 5 or earlier) than IIS. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Cons to Fusebox
I've recently written a medium sized app using FB3, and it runs fine. There's the very occasional call. - Original Message - From: Matt Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:03 pm Subject: Re: Cons to Fusebox > Thx to Brian and Barney both, > > It just seems that lately there's been a lot of talk about FB3 > performance issues, and the growing impression I was getting was > that it was a dog, which hasn't really been something I've seen > discussed a lot until fairly recently. Maybe its the excitement > building over the next release. Your two posts put this into > perspective. > Er... its been posted before I know, but does anyone have a link > to the FB4 beta files? Its publicly available somewhere, isn't it? > > -- > --- > Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com > --- > > -- > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Cons to Fusebox
Thx to Brian and Barney both, It just seems that lately there's been a lot of talk about FB3 performance issues, and the growing impression I was getting was that it was a dog, which hasn't really been something I've seen discussed a lot until fairly recently. Maybe its the excitement building over the next release. Your two posts put this into perspective. Er... its been posted before I know, but does anyone have a link to the FB4 beta files? Its publicly available somewhere, isn't it? -- --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
jrunscripts
Is the purpose of the JRunScripts virtual directory in IIS only for Flash Remoting? -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: FDF creation (PDF)
Hey Jeff,
I just tried your idea and t is close...When I ran the script it
gave me the pdf with only what was inside the tag...
You can view it here : http://64.42.203.147/forms/test.pdf
Below is the new code
%FDF-1.2
1 0 obj <<
/FDF <<
/Fields
[
<< /T (#VarName#) /V
(#Evaluate("VarStruct.#VarName#")#)>>
]
/F (#VarStruct.PDFURL#)
>>
>>
endobj
trailer
<>
%%EOF
http://64.42.203.147/forms/test.pdf"; ADDTOKEN="NO">
==
Joel Blanchette
IT and System Specialist
Point of Impact Technologies Inc.
Tel: (204) 989-0013
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
==
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Garza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:24 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: FDF creation (PDF)
Basically, get rid of the CFCONTENT tag and wrap everything with a
CFSAVECONTENT tag instead and pass the variable on to CFFILE. Then
relocate to the newly created file on the server.
HTH,
Jeff Garza
- Original Message -
From: "Joel Blanchette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:50 PM
Subject: FDF creation (PDF)
Hello All
I have this pdf with form field inside. I am using the PDFFormFiller
custom tag
(http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/exchange/index.cfm#loc=en_us&view=sn1
31&viewName=ColdFusion%20Extension&extID=1001002)
To implement the values in the pdf. Now the problem with this tag I
that I need to save the new pdf file on the server then show it to the
user with a redirect.
What do I have to change in the code to make this happen.
%FDF-1.2
1 0 obj <<
/FDF <<
/Fields
[
<< /T (#VarName#) /V (#Evaluate("VarStruct.#VarName#")#)>>
]
/F (#VarStruct.PDFURL#)
>>
>>
endobj
trailer
<>
%%EOF
==
Joel Blanchette
IT and System Specialist
Point of Impact Technologies Inc.
Tel: (204) 989-0013
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ==
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in
ColdFusion and related topics.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Cons to Fusebox
Well, I for one am very glad there's something like Fusebox out there. Saves me a bunch of time setting up a framework... Mind you, I'm looking more towards mach-ii than FB4. Now FB2, that was lame :) - Original Message - From: Brian Kotek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 2:42 pm Subject: Cons to Fusebox > In most cases, your individual fuse files for Fusebox 3 will work > without modification in Fusebox 4. However, if you want to use > some of the more advanced features of Fusebox 4 (content > components specifically) it may require some changes to the way > you are outputting things. > > Furthermore, because you can execute multiple Fuseactions in > Fusebox 4 without using CFMODULE and with no performance penalty, > you can probably reuse some of your FB3 CFMODULE fuseactions > without much change in FB4. > > Really, the only people who will have trouble porting to Fusebox 4 > are people who grew overly-reliant on CFMODULE (who's slower > performance is a CF issue not a Fusebox issue), or who > intermingled too much programming logic into their displays (a > symptom of deeper problems than simply a challenging conversion to > FB4). > You can keep on using FB3 for as long as you want, you don't HAVE > to upgrade. But unfortunately in the real world, technologies > have a limited lifespan. If you have a C application and you want > to reap the benefits of C#, you have to recode. That's real life. > Luckily, a great deal of the guts of an FB3 application will port > cleanly to FB4 in most situations. > > Hope that helps, > > Brian > > >Brian Kotek wrote: > >>Performance in Fusebox 4 is almost 10 TIMES better than Fusebox > 3. > >In > >>other words, a page that took 400 milliseconds to render in > Fusebox 3 > > > >>takes about 40 milliseconds to render in production mode with > Fusebox > >4. > > > >So what happens to all the folks who hitched up their wagons to > FB3? > >Time for a free (i.e. unbillable) do-over? How does this reflect > on > >the cost of implementing FB3, in retrospect? Will new-cause but > >similar-effect issues arise in FB4? > > > >I'm anxiously awaiting fb4's release as I very much want to give > it a > >look. Standardization is good; disciplined code is good. > Torpedoed > >performance and a limited lifespan after adoption is terrifying. > > > >-- > >--- > > >Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com > >--- > > > -- > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Cons to Fusebox
*waving* Hi Nick. Yes Nick, but I know your site and unless it has changed that much in the past year and a half, it was a FB2 site that incorporated a lot of no no's (such as display code in the switch). In Fb4 you don't need to use the CFModule, just throw another Fuseaction into the Queue, also with the parsed files (compile per se), the core files don't load themselves mostly unless you are in development, or a parsed file doesn't exist for some reason. FB4 is much much faster then FB3. >We have a fairly large site, and we have begun to componentize a lot >of the web controls such as select drop-down lists, partial displays, >and any other functions that are useable. All these components are >being called by cfmodule routed back through the index (core file), >since they are organized in separate circuits. So on a large dsp page, >we could have as much as 5 to 10 cfmodule calls, pulling displays, >menus, and other web controls components. The overhead of the core >file is now noticeable. > >We're using cf5. > > >Nick Han > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/16/03 11:20AM >>> >Hey everyone, > >Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or >Fusebox in general. >I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased >results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for >some cons as I have a decent list of pros. > >Thanks, > >Mike ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
Brian's comparison needs qualification. If a request takes 400ms to render, but 350 of that was a slow query, then it'll only drop to around 360ms with FB4. It's only the framework code that is enormously faster, not the application code. In my experiences, the framework overhead was annoying, but fairly small (never more than 10-15%) of total execution time. Assuming that tenfold decrease is valid (it's probably reasonable), you're only looking at shaving 10% off your total execution time. The point is that FB3 isn't horribly slower, it's the application that takes most of the time, not the framework. FB4 is has a lighter weight execution time, but it's a small difference overall. Hal Helms (the godfather of FB) has his personal site running XFB, the precursor to FB3, so it's now 2 generations behind and functioning like a champ. I've got sites in production that are running XFB, FB3 and FB4. I don't intend to go back and migrate any time soon, because all are running just dandy. And while it'd be nice to have FB4 across the board, the core ideals of the framework were mostly there back in XFB, and that's the important part. FB3 and FB4 are just more refined ways to get the same results. barneyb --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Matt Robertson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 1:25 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Cons to Fusebox > > > Brian Kotek wrote: > >Performance in Fusebox 4 is almost 10 TIMES better than Fusebox 3. In > >other words, a page that took 400 milliseconds to render in Fusebox 3 > >takes about 40 milliseconds to render in production mode with Fusebox 4. > > So what happens to all the folks who hitched up their wagons to > FB3? Time for a free (i.e. unbillable) do-over? How does this > reflect on the cost of implementing FB3, in retrospect? Will > new-cause but similar-effect issues arise in FB4? > > I'm anxiously awaiting fb4's release as I very much want to give > it a look. Standardization is good; disciplined code is good. > Torpedoed performance and a limited lifespan after adoption is terrifying. > > -- > --- > Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com > --- > > -- > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Cons to Fusebox
In most cases, your individual fuse files for Fusebox 3 will work without modification in Fusebox 4. However, if you want to use some of the more advanced features of Fusebox 4 (content components specifically) it may require some changes to the way you are outputting things. Furthermore, because you can execute multiple Fuseactions in Fusebox 4 without using CFMODULE and with no performance penalty, you can probably reuse some of your FB3 CFMODULE fuseactions without much change in FB4. Really, the only people who will have trouble porting to Fusebox 4 are people who grew overly-reliant on CFMODULE (who's slower performance is a CF issue not a Fusebox issue), or who intermingled too much programming logic into their displays (a symptom of deeper problems than simply a challenging conversion to FB4). You can keep on using FB3 for as long as you want, you don't HAVE to upgrade. But unfortunately in the real world, technologies have a limited lifespan. If you have a C application and you want to reap the benefits of C#, you have to recode. That's real life. Luckily, a great deal of the guts of an FB3 application will port cleanly to FB4 in most situations. Hope that helps, Brian >Brian Kotek wrote: >>Performance in Fusebox 4 is almost 10 TIMES better than Fusebox 3. >In >>other words, a page that took 400 milliseconds to render in Fusebox 3 > >>takes about 40 milliseconds to render in production mode with Fusebox >4. > >So what happens to all the folks who hitched up their wagons to FB3? >Time for a free (i.e. unbillable) do-over? How does this reflect on >the cost of implementing FB3, in retrospect? Will new-cause but >similar-effect issues arise in FB4? > >I'm anxiously awaiting fb4's release as I very much want to give it a >look. Standardization is good; disciplined code is good. Torpedoed >performance and a limited lifespan after adoption is terrifying. > >-- >--- >Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com >--- > -- ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
CF And Quick Books
Has anyone ever used CF and Quick Books together? If so, can you please contact me off list to let me know how you made it work. TIA ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: IIS and SES URL's
Yes, but it opens a security hole if you don't have a site-wide error handler in place. Check the archives over the last couple of weeks: SES urls. Fairly thorough discussion on the subject. there's complete instrs in there on how to access the thing you're after. Let me know off-list if you can't find it in the archives. Cheers, -- --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Interface Assessment
"in particular lots of reuseable code in the form of includes, functions and tags, and a general attempt to separate logic from display as much as possible" Absolutely agree. As for the presentation and layout, I believe CSS is extremely useful and the application framework is very convenient for any re-touching of the interface as well. >While the house on the sand analogy is appropriate, I think it's also >good to remember that if you're in the business of selling houses, >even the best lot will be difficult to sell if the house built on it >is generally considered to be ugly. > >I know that the Fusebox Lifecycle Process (FLiP), which I've not used >to date, insists on all of the UI being well established as part of >the wireframe before any code is written. I'm neither married to nor >entirely opposed to this idea. I know others like it a lot because >theoretically it means never having to completely recode a redesigned >UI or being stuck with a poor UI because the client doesn't want to >pay to rewrite the code. > >When I do my own work I tend to do them both simultaneously, but I >also take a long time to formulate my thoughts about both the logic >and the interface. Once I've envisioned an interface that seems >reasonably intuitive and works well with good solid logic on the back >end, then I start writing actual code. I also don't perceive large >amounts of time lost in redesigning interfaces, although this may have >a lot to do with my coding habbits (in particular lots of reuseable >code in the form of includes, functions and tags, and a general >attempt to separate logic from display as much as possible). > >hth > >Isaac > >Original Message --- >Hi, > >The subject matter is new to me and I'll make it short >and "sweet?". So, I'll just throw out something raw, >and pls help me to chew it. >Major premise: I think it's more about Interface >Usability Assessment, rather than functionality >assessment. > >The way to tackle it is first to decompose all the >components of the Interface, then each screen under >each component. Question, would compoment A weigh more >than component B? Would screen A weigh more than >screen B? Yes? depending on each's contribution to >system/application functionality? Consult with the >client as well? What's the usual practice here? > >Secondly, what's the value of Interface Assessment if >it is done without correlation to Functionality >Assessment? A nice-looking house built on sand won't >stand. > >Thanks. > > >Li, Chunshen (Don) >http://68.32.61.40/datadata/DataMan.cfm > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: FDF creation (PDF)
Basically, get rid of the CFCONTENT tag and wrap everything with a
CFSAVECONTENT tag instead and pass the variable on to CFFILE. Then relocate
to the newly created file on the server.
HTH,
Jeff Garza
- Original Message -
From: "Joel Blanchette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:50 PM
Subject: FDF creation (PDF)
Hello All
I have this pdf with form field inside. I am using the
PDFFormFiller custom tag
(http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/exchange/index.cfm#loc=en_us&view=sn1
31&viewName=ColdFusion%20Extension&extID=1001002)
To implement the values in the pdf. Now the problem with this tag I
that I need to save the new pdf file on the server then show it to the
user with a redirect.
What do I have to change in the code to make this happen.
%FDF-1.2
1 0 obj <<
/FDF <<
/Fields
[
<< /T (#VarName#) /V
(#Evaluate("VarStruct.#VarName#")#)>>
]
/F (#VarStruct.PDFURL#)
>>
>>
endobj
trailer
<>
%%EOF
==
Joel Blanchette
IT and System Specialist
Point of Impact Technologies Inc.
Tel: (204) 989-0013
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
==
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in
ColdFusion and related topics.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Cons to Fusebox
Brian Kotek wrote: >Performance in Fusebox 4 is almost 10 TIMES better than Fusebox 3. In >other words, a page that took 400 milliseconds to render in Fusebox 3 >takes about 40 milliseconds to render in production mode with Fusebox 4. So what happens to all the folks who hitched up their wagons to FB3? Time for a free (i.e. unbillable) do-over? How does this reflect on the cost of implementing FB3, in retrospect? Will new-cause but similar-effect issues arise in FB4? I'm anxiously awaiting fb4's release as I very much want to give it a look. Standardization is good; disciplined code is good. Torpedoed performance and a limited lifespan after adoption is terrifying. -- --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Interface Assessment
I appreciate your pointers. >I'm not sure cf-talk is the best place to ask this question...but I'd >love to be wrong here, because I would like to hear what a usability >expert has to say about this. Is there even a standard practice at >all? >Personally, I'd try the webdesign-l or the new boxesandarrows list. > >Wednesday, July 16, 2003, 3:20:19 PM, you wrote: >LCD> Hi, > >LCD> The subject matter is new to me and I'll make it short >LCD> and "sweet?". > >LCD> So, I'll just throw out something raw, >LCD> and pls help me to chew it. >LCD> Major premise: I think it's more about Interface >LCD> Usability Assessment, rather than functionality >LCD> assessment. > >LCD> The way to tackle it is first to decompose all the >LCD> components of the Interface, then each screen under >LCD> each component. Question, would compoment A weigh more >LCD> than component B? Would screen A weigh more than >LCD> screen B? Yes? depending on each's contribution to >LCD> system/application functionality? Consult with the >LCD> client as well? What's the usual practice here? > >LCD> Secondly, what's the value of Interface Assessment if >LCD> it is done without correlation to Functionality >LCD> Assessment? A nice-looking house built on sand won't >LCD> stand. > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Load balanced code replication
We use rsync for doing all our installation and mirroring, be it code or data. Very nice, and works over an SSH connection for security. It's native to *nix, but I believe there is a Windows port. We have a cron job that checks for updates on the master, and if there are any, it replicates everything to the slave servers. The one problem with it is that it touches ALL the files, even if they haven't been updated, which means recompiling everything. There's probably a flag to avoid that, but it hasn't been enough of an issue to go digging through the manpage. barneyb --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Justin Hansen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:08 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: SOT: Load balanced code replication > > > We have a CFMX farm now, and the Microsoft replication isn't > working out to well right now. What type of code replication > software/strategies are you using right now? > > I think we need something that would watch a folder on a file > server and move the code up to the cf farm every few minutes. > What do/would you use? > > justin > cf programmer > not an admin > :) > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Interface Assessment
While the house on the sand analogy is appropriate, I think it's also good to remember that if you're in the business of selling houses, even the best lot will be difficult to sell if the house built on it is generally considered to be ugly. I know that the Fusebox Lifecycle Process (FLiP), which I've not used to date, insists on all of the UI being well established as part of the wireframe before any code is written. I'm neither married to nor entirely opposed to this idea. I know others like it a lot because theoretically it means never having to completely recode a redesigned UI or being stuck with a poor UI because the client doesn't want to pay to rewrite the code. When I do my own work I tend to do them both simultaneously, but I also take a long time to formulate my thoughts about both the logic and the interface. Once I've envisioned an interface that seems reasonably intuitive and works well with good solid logic on the back end, then I start writing actual code. I also don't perceive large amounts of time lost in redesigning interfaces, although this may have a lot to do with my coding habbits (in particular lots of reuseable code in the form of includes, functions and tags, and a general attempt to separate logic from display as much as possible). hth Isaac Original Message --- Hi, The subject matter is new to me and I'll make it short and "sweet?". So, I'll just throw out something raw, and pls help me to chew it. Major premise: I think it's more about Interface Usability Assessment, rather than functionality assessment. The way to tackle it is first to decompose all the components of the Interface, then each screen under each component. Question, would compoment A weigh more than component B? Would screen A weigh more than screen B? Yes? depending on each's contribution to system/application functionality? Consult with the client as well? What's the usual practice here? Secondly, what's the value of Interface Assessment if it is done without correlation to Functionality Assessment? A nice-looking house built on sand won't stand. Thanks. Li, Chunshen (Don) http://68.32.61.40/datadata/DataMan.cfm ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
I have a question. Can you use cftree in FB4? I know the FB3 core files had a problem with cftree, I had to make a change to them to get it to work. Shawn Regan -Original Message- From: Brian Kotek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:59 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Cons to Fusebox Just a note that this problem is gone in Fusebox 4. >Mike we use Fusebox heavily and the only con I have enountered (this >is FB30 and CF50) is layouts render CFFLUSH unusable. > >Otherwise we like FB all the way. > >Kind Regards - Mike Brunt >Original Message --- >Hey everyone, > >Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or >Fusebox in general. >I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased >results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for >some cons as I have a decent list of pros. > >Thanks, > >Mike ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Checking how many "checkboxes" were selected
> OK. How about passing the Form.Dir_Access to another template > different from the http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: The Access .LDB file that will not die
> I'm really trying to avoid rebooting the whole server and > I'm not even certain that will do it. What about cycling > IIS? I don't want to do that either unless I was fairly > certain that it might do the trick. If it was locked by CF, you'll probably have better luck cycling the CF Application Server service (assuming you're using CF 5 or earlier) than IIS. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
IIS and SES URL's
Is there a setting in IIS that prevents the use of SES url's? My app works fine on my laptop, but I get 404 errors on our server. -Brad ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
FDF creation (PDF)
Hello All
I have this pdf with form field inside. I am using the
PDFFormFiller custom tag
(http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/exchange/index.cfm#loc=en_us&view=sn1
31&viewName=ColdFusion%20Extension&extID=1001002)
To implement the values in the pdf. Now the problem with this tag I
that I need to save the new pdf file on the server then show it to the
user with a redirect.
What do I have to change in the code to make this happen.
%FDF-1.2
1 0 obj <<
/FDF <<
/Fields
[
<< /T (#VarName#) /V
(#Evaluate("VarStruct.#VarName#")#)>>
]
/F (#VarStruct.PDFURL#)
>>
>>
endobj
trailer
<>
%%EOF
==
Joel Blanchette
IT and System Specialist
Point of Impact Technologies Inc.
Tel: (204) 989-0013
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
==
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in
ColdFusion and related topics.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Interface Assessment
I'm not sure cf-talk is the best place to ask this question...but I'd love to be wrong here, because I would like to hear what a usability expert has to say about this. Is there even a standard practice at all? Personally, I'd try the webdesign-l or the new boxesandarrows list. Wednesday, July 16, 2003, 3:20:19 PM, you wrote: LCD> Hi, LCD> The subject matter is new to me and I'll make it short LCD> and "sweet?". LCD> So, I'll just throw out something raw, LCD> and pls help me to chew it. LCD> Major premise: I think it's more about Interface LCD> Usability Assessment, rather than functionality LCD> assessment. LCD> The way to tackle it is first to decompose all the LCD> components of the Interface, then each screen under LCD> each component. Question, would compoment A weigh more LCD> than component B? Would screen A weigh more than LCD> screen B? Yes? depending on each's contribution to LCD> system/application functionality? Consult with the LCD> client as well? What's the usual practice here? LCD> Secondly, what's the value of Interface Assessment if LCD> it is done without correlation to Functionality LCD> Assessment? A nice-looking house built on sand won't LCD> stand. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Calling CF file through Javascript
The following doesn't work for some reason:
If I give the file any other extension (.js, .html, .cfml) it works, but not
with ".cfm"
What I'm I missing?
BTW, temp.cfm's contents are simply: alert('foo');
-Brad
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.
http://www.cfhosting.com
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Cons to Fusebox
Performance in Fusebox 4 is almost 10 TIMES better than Fusebox 3. In other words, a page that took 400 milliseconds to render in Fusebox 3 takes about 40 milliseconds to render in production mode with Fusebox 4. >In addition to cfflush being unuseable within FB layouts, I'll also >mention that FB3 is awfully heavy to be running it as a custom tag. >I've done it, and in some circumstances it's doable, but for instance, >I had an application which was developed in FB3 with a separate >circuit for a roles-based security model. We wanted to use the circuit >as a custom tag within other circuits in order to occlude various >features which were protected by the security model. Calling the >circuit as a custom tag turned out to be far too costly to use that >approach. Granted that this is an "advanced" feature of FuseBox, but >it's also a potential hazard if you get a developer who comes in and >sets something up that way and then you end up wondering why a whole >bunch of pages are horrendously slow. > >I've used fusebox in the past and I can in the future if a client >needs or wants. For my own development I don't prefer it. No offense >to Hal and company, personally I find it slow (both development and >page loads) and inflexible -- at least, that was my impression of FB3. >One FB advocate friend of mine (who shall remain nameless) says it's >because I'm too much of a "power user" (his view being that the big >advantage of FB is standardization for the average developer). > >The best example I can give of why I found the framework slow and >inflexible is this: my Tapestry CMS includes an add/remove components >wizard which is much like the Windows add/remove programs wizard. It's >wicked fast and allows add-on components to be installed or removed >through a browser interface without modifying or overwriting any of >the existing application code, without entering any file path >information, and without so much as a single line of programming. It >also uses cfflush to display installation progress. As a whole this >couldn't have been done in FB3 without so significantly modifying the >framework that I would have ended up doing more work than I did >starting from scratch. > >I haven't looked at mach-ii yet. > >hth > >Isaac > >Original Message --- >Mike we use Fusebox heavily and the only con I have enountered (this >is FB30 and CF50) is layouts render CFFLUSH unusable. > >Otherwise we like FB all the way. > >Kind Regards - Mike Brunt >Original Message --- >Hey everyone, > >Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or >Fusebox in general. >I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased >results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for >some cons as I have a decent list of pros. > >Thanks, > >Mike ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Cons to Fusebox
Again, issues like this are not present in Fusebox 4. There are no cfmodule calls necessary. >We have a fairly large site, and we have begun to componentize a lot >of the web controls such as select drop-down lists, partial displays, >and any other functions that are useable. All these components are >being called by cfmodule routed back through the index (core file), >since they are organized in separate circuits. So on a large dsp page, >we could have as much as 5 to 10 cfmodule calls, pulling displays, >menus, and other web controls components. The overhead of the core >file is now noticeable. > >We're using cf5. > > >Nick Han > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/16/03 11:20AM >>> >Hey everyone, > >Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or >Fusebox in general. >I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased >results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for >some cons as I have a decent list of pros. > >Thanks, > >Mike ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Sorry Quick SQL
I found an answer ... SELECT * FROM email_blast WHERE 1 = 0 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_brd_cable = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_brd_fxwirls =1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_brd_wirlan = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_cell_infra = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_cell_hand = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_vsat = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_sens = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_testeq = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_fiboptic = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_miltry = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_space = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_lit_cd_designgd = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_lit_seltgde_hrd = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_lit_newsletter = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_lit_selectguide = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ann_prod_ann = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ann_press_releases = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ann_web_feat = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ann_events = 1 >Hi All, > >I know this isn't CF but this is the only list I know of. Does anyone know any >good SQL lists or a quick answer. > >Sorry and thanks. > >I've got a form with multiple check boxes that we want to use to send out mass >e-mails to suscribed customers. The sender with slection only the items that >apply to the content of the blast. I'm having a hard time writing the >conditional SQL that will allow one checkbox and multiple checkbox selections. >The embl_sub_trigger = 1 is just the subscribe bit value. Any advice or help >would be appreciated. > > > > SELECT * > FROM email_blast_out > WHERE >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_brd_cable = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_brd_fxwirls =1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_brd_wirlan = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_cell_infra = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_cell_hand = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_mic_vsat = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_mic_sens = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_mic_testeq = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_mic_fiboptic = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_mic_miltry = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ms_mic_space = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_lit_cd_designgd = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_lit_seltgde_hrd = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_lit_newsletter = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_lit_selectguide = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ann_prod_ann = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ann_press_releases = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ann_web_feat = 1 OR >embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND >embl_ann_events = 1 OR > > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Cons to Fusebox
Barney, Very useful and good points. Thank you. Mike - Original Message - From: "Barney Boisvert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:06 PM Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox > Here's some arguments against using FB4: > > - That horrible XML syntax for building an app. Have to learn another > language in order to use it. > - Can't put [as much] logic in the switch file (now XML), like in FB3 > - FB can make it harder to develop an app without proper planning > beforehand > > Then there are these three that are foolish, but widespread: > > - it's not supported (neither is Struts) > - it makes slow apps (a valid argument against FB3, not so with FB4) > - it's hard to use (there's an initial learning curve, but after that, > everything is easier and faster) > > There were a lot of good arguments against FB3, but most of those have been > eliminated with FB4 (including the CFFLUSH problem). It's not a solution > for everyone, but no framework is. Best bet: try several out, and then > pick. > > I think FB4 provides a very nice balance between ease of use and > functionality. If you take a look at Benoit Hediard's MVCF framework at > www.benorama.com, you'll see a totally different approach, with an empasis > on enterprise apps (huge scaling, integrated i18n, real n-tier > architecture), much of which is too much overhead for smaller projects. > However, FB4 is extensible enough (via plugins) to allow you to easily > integrate almost any feature you need, without hacking core (including a > CFC-based model layer). > > My personal opinion is that FB4 having the same name as FB3 is not a benefit > to FB4, as it has to deal with all the negative press FB3 garnered. It's a > totally different beast. > > Not quite what you were looking for, I'm sure, but hopefully useful none the > less. > > cheers, > barneyb > > --- > Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer > AudienceCentral > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > voice : 360.756.8080 x12 > fax : 360.647.5351 > > www.audiencecentral.com > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:54 AM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox > > > > > > Mike we use Fusebox heavily and the only con I have enountered > > (this is FB30 and CF50) is layouts render CFFLUSH unusable. > > > > Otherwise we like FB all the way. > > > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt > > Original Message --- > > Hey everyone, > > > > Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 > > or Fusebox in general. > > I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some > > biased results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really > > looking for some cons as I have a decent list of pros. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mike > > > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Interface Assessment
Hi, The subject matter is new to me and I'll make it short and "sweet?". So, I'll just throw out something raw, and pls help me to chew it. Major premise: I think it's more about Interface Usability Assessment, rather than functionality assessment. The way to tackle it is first to decompose all the components of the Interface, then each screen under each component. Question, would compoment A weigh more than component B? Would screen A weigh more than screen B? Yes? depending on each's contribution to system/application functionality? Consult with the client as well? What's the usual practice here? Secondly, what's the value of Interface Assessment if it is done without correlation to Functionality Assessment? A nice-looking house built on sand won't stand. Thanks. Li, Chunshen (Don) http://68.32.61.40/datadata/DataMan.cfm ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: RE: Cons to Fusebox
In addition to cfflush being unuseable within FB layouts, I'll also mention that FB3 is awfully heavy to be running it as a custom tag. I've done it, and in some circumstances it's doable, but for instance, I had an application which was developed in FB3 with a separate circuit for a roles-based security model. We wanted to use the circuit as a custom tag within other circuits in order to occlude various features which were protected by the security model. Calling the circuit as a custom tag turned out to be far too costly to use that approach. Granted that this is an "advanced" feature of FuseBox, but it's also a potential hazard if you get a developer who comes in and sets something up that way and then you end up wondering why a whole bunch of pages are horrendously slow. I've used fusebox in the past and I can in the future if a client needs or wants. For my own development I don't prefer it. No offense to Hal and company, personally I find it slow (both development and page loads) and inflexible -- at least, that was my impression of FB3. One FB advocate friend of mine (who shall remain nameless) says it's because I'm too much of a "power user" (his view being that the big advantage of FB is standardization for the average developer). The best example I can give of why I found the framework slow and inflexible is this: my Tapestry CMS includes an add/remove components wizard which is much like the Windows add/remove programs wizard. It's wicked fast and allows add-on components to be installed or removed through a browser interface without modifying or overwriting any of the existing application code, without entering any file path information, and without so much as a single line of programming. It also uses cfflush to display installation progress. As a whole this couldn't have been done in FB3 without so significantly modifying the framework that I would have ended up doing more work than I did starting from scratch. I haven't looked at mach-ii yet. hth Isaac Original Message --- Mike we use Fusebox heavily and the only con I have enountered (this is FB30 and CF50) is layouts render CFFLUSH unusable. Otherwise we like FB all the way. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Original Message --- Hey everyone, Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or Fusebox in general. I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for some cons as I have a decent list of pros. Thanks, Mike ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Cons to Fusebox
We have a fairly large site, and we have begun to componentize a lot of the web controls such as select drop-down lists, partial displays, and any other functions that are useable. All these components are being called by cfmodule routed back through the index (core file), since they are organized in separate circuits. So on a large dsp page, we could have as much as 5 to 10 cfmodule calls, pulling displays, menus, and other web controls components. The overhead of the core file is now noticeable. We're using cf5. Nick Han >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/16/03 11:20AM >>> Hey everyone, Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or Fusebox in general. I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for some cons as I have a decent list of pros. Thanks, Mike ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
Here's some arguments against using FB4: - That horrible XML syntax for building an app. Have to learn another language in order to use it. - Can't put [as much] logic in the switch file (now XML), like in FB3 - FB can make it harder to develop an app without proper planning beforehand Then there are these three that are foolish, but widespread: - it's not supported (neither is Struts) - it makes slow apps (a valid argument against FB3, not so with FB4) - it's hard to use (there's an initial learning curve, but after that, everything is easier and faster) There were a lot of good arguments against FB3, but most of those have been eliminated with FB4 (including the CFFLUSH problem). It's not a solution for everyone, but no framework is. Best bet: try several out, and then pick. I think FB4 provides a very nice balance between ease of use and functionality. If you take a look at Benoit Hediard's MVCF framework at www.benorama.com, you'll see a totally different approach, with an empasis on enterprise apps (huge scaling, integrated i18n, real n-tier architecture), much of which is too much overhead for smaller projects. However, FB4 is extensible enough (via plugins) to allow you to easily integrate almost any feature you need, without hacking core (including a CFC-based model layer). My personal opinion is that FB4 having the same name as FB3 is not a benefit to FB4, as it has to deal with all the negative press FB3 garnered. It's a totally different beast. Not quite what you were looking for, I'm sure, but hopefully useful none the less. cheers, barneyb --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:54 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Cons to Fusebox > > > Mike we use Fusebox heavily and the only con I have enountered > (this is FB30 and CF50) is layouts render CFFLUSH unusable. > > Otherwise we like FB all the way. > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt > Original Message --- > Hey everyone, > > Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 > or Fusebox in general. > I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some > biased results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really > looking for some cons as I have a decent list of pros. > > Thanks, > > Mike > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
SOT: Load balanced code replication
We have a CFMX farm now, and the Microsoft replication isn't working out to well right now. What type of code replication software/strategies are you using right now? I think we need something that would watch a folder on a file server and move the code up to the cf farm every few minutes. What do/would you use? justin cf programmer not an admin :) ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Sorry Quick SQL
Hi All, I know this isn't CF but this is the only list I know of. Does anyone know any good SQL lists or a quick answer. Sorry and thanks. I've got a form with multiple check boxes that we want to use to send out mass e-mails to suscribed customers. The sender with slection only the items that apply to the content of the blast. I'm having a hard time writing the conditional SQL that will allow one checkbox and multiple checkbox selections. The embl_sub_trigger = 1 is just the subscribe bit value. Any advice or help would be appreciated. SELECT * FROM email_blast_out WHERE embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_brd_cable = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_brd_fxwirls =1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_brd_wirlan = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_cell_infra = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_cell_hand = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_vsat = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_sens = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_testeq = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_fiboptic = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_miltry = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ms_mic_space = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_lit_cd_designgd = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_lit_seltgde_hrd = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_lit_newsletter = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_lit_selectguide = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ann_prod_ann = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ann_press_releases = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ann_web_feat = 1 OR embl_sub_trigger = 1 AND embl_ann_events = 1 OR ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
OT: The Access .LDB file that will not die
I've got an Access 97 database that has a lock file that won't go away. I just need to delete the database file, as we've migrated the data to MySQL. The Access database is no longer being used, and I've deleted the old ODBC dsn pointing at file. I've tried the usual bad query against the db. I've waited as long as three days for the lock to expire. I've taken ownership as an administrator. I've opened the database and made some nonsense table design changes, which are accepted. No luck. I always get a sharing violation error. I've even copied a zero length file over top of the old database without it complaining. But I can't delete the damn thing and the .LDB file just plain will not go away. I'm really trying to avoid rebooting the whole server and I'm not even certain that will do it. What about cycling IIS? I don't want to do that either unless I was fairly certain that it might do the trick. Jim ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
OT: MS SQL Replication question
I removed a Publication on my distributor. I received a message to remove the subscriptions manually on each server for that publication. How can I do this?In Enterprise Manager I am unable to Right Click and delete the old subscription. Any ideas? Eric ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: CF 5.0 vs. MX
-- Original Message -- From: "Clark Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >- what are the shortcomings of MX, if any? Probably my biggest complaint about MX is the error reporting. If you have an error in a file that's included in another file (for example, the line occurs on line 6 of file "B". File "A" includes file "B"), MX will report the error as having occurred on line 6 of file "A". If you're working on an app that uses includes and cfmodules a lot, then it's a huge issue. (Of course, if you're like me, you just write error-free code :) ) Scott Scott Brady http://www.scottbrady.net/ ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Scheduled Tasks
We had the same problem, at least we got the same error message, and had the same behavior. We had a scheduled task running just great, then the changed the security setting of the site to Windows challenge/response in the IE Server. The task stopped working. But when I run it directly it worked fine, because I was logged in and authenticated. But CF couldn't because it could not handle the IE windows response/response setting. I changed the security setting on the template the scheduled task was trying to run to allow anomalous (I could careless if anybody run this file, all it does is check the availability of database servers, and if they aren't available send an error message to the developers). From then on, no problems. Don't forget to check the IE security settings of the site, the directory and the file. It can be set at any of these levels, and unless overridden at a lower level, all sub-entities will have the selected security. That's what did it to us any way. HTH. -- Ian Skinner Web Programmer BloodSource Sacramento, CA -Original Message- From: Critz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 8:03 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Scheduled Tasks oi Mike!! yeah it just said status code unavailable or something like that. oh well i'll muck with it later. Crit Wednesday, July 16, 2003, 10:54:33 AM, you wrote: HM> Did you check the error log and the executive log to see if any additional HM> info is available there? HM> M HM> -Original Message- HM> From: Critz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] HM> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 10:30 AM HM> To: CF-Talk HM> Subject: Scheduled Tasks HM> oi CF-Talk,!! HM> I've got a scheduled task that has been running fine. up till now. HM> The only thing I can think HM> of is I now have Norton running on the server. But I've got real HM> time file protection turned HM> off HM> I can browse the url of the scheduled task from that machine but when HM> i run it in the admin I HM> get: HM> The URL is a redirection URL. HM> The URL is protected by IIS NT Challenge/Response or Apache .htaccess HM> password. The Username and Password text fields for editing a scheduled task HM> are intended to support Basic Authentication only. HM> The Domain Name lookup failed. Try using the IP address of the domain HM> whenever possible. HM> The URL is an SSL site, but the SSL port was specified incorrectly. HM> The Web site is not responding. HM> The directory specified for published results does not exist. HM> any ideas?? HM> Crit HM> --- HM> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] HM> ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Cons to Fusebox
Just a note that this problem is gone in Fusebox 4. >Mike we use Fusebox heavily and the only con I have enountered (this >is FB30 and CF50) is layouts render CFFLUSH unusable. > >Otherwise we like FB all the way. > >Kind Regards - Mike Brunt >Original Message --- >Hey everyone, > >Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or >Fusebox in general. >I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased >results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for >some cons as I have a decent list of pros. > >Thanks, > >Mike ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: db records with cftags in them do not render -help
That makes me laugh or cry not sure what I will do. I have been working with CF for 5 years and I was aware that you could not put tags and functions into a var, or in this case a database, but, I assumed that there was a work around for that. I have a cf driven photo gallery module that I would like to include into a database record using a cfinclude. guess I will go back to the drawing board. Mark W. Breneman -Macromedia Certified ColdFusion Developer -Network / Web Server Administrator Vivid Media [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.vividmedia.com 608.270.9770 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Checking how many "checkboxes" were selected
OK. How about passing the Form.Dir_Access to another template different from the
> >
> > > name="Select_All_OMITDIR" OnClick="SelectAll('Omit');">
> > > name="Clear_All_OMITDIR" OnClick="ClearAll('Omit');">
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> In your action page, using CF, you can examine the number of values in the
> Form.Dir_Access list. When you have a form with a bunch of checkboxes with
> the same name but with different values, those will be represented in the
> action page as a single Form variable containing a comma-delimited list of
> values:
>
> You selected #ListLen(Form.Dir_Access)# directories in
> the form.
>
> Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
> http://www.figleaf.com/
> voice: (202) 797-5496
> fax: (202) 797-5444
>
>
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.
http://www.cfhosting.com
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Cons to Fusebox
Mike we use Fusebox heavily and the only con I have enountered (this is FB30 and CF50) is layouts render CFFLUSH unusable. Otherwise we like FB all the way. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Original Message --- Hey everyone, Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or Fusebox in general. I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for some cons as I have a decent list of pros. Thanks, Mike ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Cons to Fusebox
Hey everyone, Some co-workers have asked me for some pros and cons to Fusebox 4 or Fusebox in general. I polled the Fusebox list awhile back and obviously got some biased results... anyone care to chime in I guess im really looking for some cons as I have a decent list of pros. Thanks, Mike ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Checking how many "checkboxes" were selected
You should get a comma delimited list of values in the FORM.Dir_Access
field, so using ListLen() on it should get you the result you're looking
for. Make sure you do an isDefined() first though, because if no checkboxes
are checked, then the variable won't be defined.
barneyb
---
Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer
AudienceCentral
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
voice : 360.756.8080 x12
fax : 360.647.5351
www.audiencecentral.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Bushy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 10:56 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: re: Checking how many "checkboxes" were selected
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Is there a way to check or display to an action page how many
> checkboxes where selected from the below loop?
>
>
>
>name="Select_All_OMITDIR" OnClick="SelectAll('Omit');">
>name="Clear_All_OMITDIR" OnClick="ClearAll('Omit');">
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.
http://www.cfhosting.com
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Checking how many "checkboxes" were selected
> Is there a way to check or display to an action page how many
> checkboxes where selected from the below loop?
>
>
>
>name="Select_All_OMITDIR" OnClick="SelectAll('Omit');">
>name="Clear_All_OMITDIR" OnClick="ClearAll('Omit');">
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
In your action page, using CF, you can examine the number of values in the
Form.Dir_Access list. When you have a form with a bunch of checkboxes with
the same name but with different values, those will be represented in the
action page as a single Form variable containing a comma-delimited list of
values:
You selected #ListLen(Form.Dir_Access)# directories in
the form.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
voice: (202) 797-5496
fax: (202) 797-5444
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more
resources for the community.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
re: Checking how many "checkboxes" were selected
Hi, Is there a way to check or display to an action page how many checkboxes where selected from the below loop? ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: CF 5.0 vs. MX
> -Original Message- > From: Clark Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:54 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: CF 5.0 vs. MX > > I've been searching for days now and found bits and pieces of comparisons > on > specific issues and found a few reviews by reporters. Some say MX is > horrible, some say MX is much better, but I'm interested to find out what > "real" CFMX users who have been using it for a while think. We're trying > to > decide whether or not to upgrade to MX. > > - Has anyone gone back to 5.0 after using MX? I've heard of several - in every case it was due, nearly fully, to the fact that they were heavily invested in COM. CF5 is a C++ engine that does COM very well, CFMX is a Java engine that does COM... period. > - How much of a pain is it to have the pages compile everytime you update > them? None at all - the process is seamless and automatic. There is no extra work on the developer's side. Even for large pages the compilation is never more than a few seconds. If this is a problem for your users you can also choose to precompile your page to eliminate this (effectively running them yourself before the user's hit them). > - what are the best improvements in MX? I'm hampered here since my code must run in both 5 and mx, but I'll throw what I've seen in. The direct line to Java can be really helpful and new ways to leverage it are being seen every day. People call out directly to Java to do things that CF tags don't do. For example CFFILE is great, but for parsing large log files the fact that it brings the entire file into memory can be a pain. So don't use it! Call out to Java and instantiate a file streaming object - it's ONE LINE of code. People are also calling out to Java to get more control over mail, images, etc. I think that this will become more and more the truly powerful aspect of CFMX as time goes on (and as we CFers get our minds around Java). CFCs are great, tho' I've been unable to take advantage of them as of yet. They are also, unfortunately a little buggy in places... but (some very big) improvements are on the way so I'm not going to rush to them until then. The main benefit to CFC's in the future will simply be that CF programmer's will begin to think in Object terms. I'm not completely ga-ga for OO, but it's immensely useful in many, many places (but then again so is procedural programming - you need both, I think). CFers have always been at a disadvantage because they were only given procedural tools... CFCs offer the ability to design pretty much whatever architecture you like using only CF. > - what are the shortcomings of MX, if any? The main one I've seen/heard about is the poor COM support. This should be expected with the architecture shift but it still hit some people like a slap in the face. My main problem with CFMX was the lack of admin documentation concerning changes from 5.0 to MX. There is a guide, but it focuses on CFML and applications. We had to search the knowledgebase to find things like the multi-home setting, the fact that Windows Authentication doesn't work for SQL Server through JDBC, the default ClOB settings and so forth. It's all calmed down now, but it made for a VERY rocky start for some people. > - how does the performance compare? Traffic load? DB queries? Page loads? > - stability issues? I've had very little problem after the Updaters. Before that there were problems with stability (mostly in the Web server connectors). Performance (in comparison with CF 5.0) can be spotty. Generally it's better, but in some cases it's not. A lot depends on how you code. Often the little tricks that saved you a lot of time in CF 5.0 simply don't work or actually hinder you in CFMX. On average I don't think that most people will see a large difference. This is another area that's getting some pretty impressive improvements soon. DB Queries depend more on the access technology than anything else - if you use Type IV drivers in MX you'll be happy - stay away from the ODBC-Bridge if you can at all help it. > If anyone has any feedback on any or all of these topics that would be > great. The more feedback the better. Or if anyone knows of an existing > discussion on this topic please let me know! There are plenty to be had... the MM Support forums are brimming as are the HouseOfFusion archives. Also check alt.comp.languages.coldfusion in google groups for some good ones. Jim Davis ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: dynamic query question
The columns of a query are accessible as queryname.columnlist. You can then do #queryName[someCol][rownum]# === Raymond Camden, ColdFusion Jedi Master for Mindseye, Inc (www.mindseye.com) Member of Team Macromedia (http://www.macromedia.com/go/teammacromedia) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog : www.camdenfamily.com/morpheus/blog Yahoo IM : morpheus "My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is." - Yoda > -Original Message- > From: DeShazo, Jonathan P. (Keane) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:19 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: dynamic query question > > > Why not alias the column name? > As in: > > > SELECT #form.material# AS material, > FROMcc, compat > where chemicalID = #chemicalID# > > > -Then refernce the output as cc.material. > > > > -Original Message- > From: Emmet McGovern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:56 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: dynamic query question > > > Or better explanation. How do I set the #form.material# so I > can access it as a query variable? > > Emmet > > -Original Message- > From: Emmet McGovern > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:42 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: dynamic query question > > I was handed a poorly designed to integrate into an app. The > record set is fairly huge. > > I need to access the db using a dynamic query where the > select column statement is populated by a form. > > > SELECT #form.material#, > FROMcc, compat > where chemicalID = #chemicalID# > > > My question is how do I reference the column name for output > if I don't know the column name on the processing page? I > know ive seen something about this somewhere. > > Emmet > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: CF 5.0 vs. MX
responses inline --- Barney Boisvert, Senior Development Engineer AudienceCentral [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice : 360.756.8080 x12 fax : 360.647.5351 www.audiencecentral.com > -Original Message- > From: Clark Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: None > To: CF-Talk > Subject: CF 5.0 vs. MX > > > I've been searching for days now and found bits and pieces of > comparisons on > specific issues and found a few reviews by reporters. Some say MX is > horrible, some say MX is much better, but I'm interested to find out what > "real" CFMX users who have been using it for a while think. We're > trying to > decide whether or not to upgrade to MX. Do it. Especially with RedSky coming out. > - Has anyone gone back to 5.0 after using MX? I haven't. We upgraded from CF4.5 to CFMX and didn't have any issues. Ran the code analyzer, changed a couple of residual parameterExists() calls to isDefined(), and did the switch. Completely painless. > - How much of a pain is it to have the pages compile everytime you update > them? Initially annoying in development, but it's not that big a deal. You get used to it. I'd acutally say it's a benefit to some degree, because you start thinking through your changes, rather than the guess-refresh-guess-refresh cycle that you can get into with the faster initial page loads. > - what are the best improvements in MX? tag-based UDFs, and CFCs are the big ones. CFCs are nice, but they require a fundemental shift in development style, which isn't for everyone. tab-based UDFs, on the other hand, are totally accessible to anyone familiar with CF5 UDFs. They are even more powerful, because you can use ALL languages constructs, not just CFSCRIPT. > - what are the shortcomings of MX, if any? There are some fundemental problems with CFCs. However, many of those are fixed with the RedSky release sometime this summer. Check out Raymond Camden's site for more info. He has a presentation or two that were specifically cleared for release, even though the info is restricted by the NDA. Also, the hype about CFLOCK and how CFMX does locking for you was horrible. CFLOCK is still needed to preserve data integrity. On CF5 and below, it was needed to preserve data integrity, and prevent memory corruption. Only the latter is taken care of my CFMX automatically, so you still need to lock. Installation is also supposedly somewhat quirky, although I haven't really had any problems with it. > - how does the performance compare? Traffic load? DB queries? Page loads? I don't have any formal numbers for you. It's noticably faster than CF4.5 though, even under light load. > - stability issues? I haven't had any problems with it crashing or dying, although I know there have been people with the opposite experience. > If anyone has any feedback on any or all of these topics that would be > great. The more feedback the better. Or if anyone knows of an existing > discussion on this topic please let me know! > > Thanks, > Clark > RebatePlace.com - Find rebates. Compare prices. Save money. > > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: dynamic query question
Damn your smart!!! Why has my brain forsaken me!? -Original Message- From: DeShazo, Jonathan P. (Keane) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 1:19 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: dynamic query question Why not alias the column name? As in: SELECT #form.material# AS material, FROMcc, compat where chemicalID = #chemicalID# -Then refernce the output as cc.material. -Original Message- From: Emmet McGovern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:56 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: dynamic query question Or better explanation. How do I set the #form.material# so I can access it as a query variable? Emmet -Original Message- From: Emmet McGovern Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:42 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: dynamic query question I was handed a poorly designed to integrate into an app. The record set is fairly huge. I need to access the db using a dynamic query where the select column statement is populated by a form. SELECT #form.material#, FROMcc, compat where chemicalID = #chemicalID# My question is how do I reference the column name for output if I don't know the column name on the processing page? I know ive seen something about this somewhere. Emmet ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: ot- visual Xpath Navigator
> does anyone know of a visual xpath navigator? It's not exactly a "navigator", but it's pretty neat and useful, I think: http://www.vbxml.com/xpathvisualizer/ Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
