Re: Design Pattern Question
On Sunday, Jan 12, 2003, at 09:13 US/Pacific, Mike Brunt wrote: > Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of > procedural > methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion there is > a > further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has done for us, that I > have not > yet seen expounded in CFMX tutorials etc. And of course they are attacking very different problems. Fusebox is a framework. FLiP is a project lifecycle methodology. Design Patterns are 'just' a way of factoring your code to aid reusability or performance or whatever a particular design pattern is intended to address. > In addition by using Fusebox we have found it easy to bring in > developers who had never coded on CF before but who had a good grasp of > HTML, JavaScript and/or ASP-JSP. Yes, this is definitely one of Fusebox's strengths. > Finally, the logicality of using Circuits as a mapping/pathing > mechanism addresses to physical layout questions of developing a web > application. I found that the hardest part of Fusebox to work with - I'm writing up my experience of converting my own (PHP) site to Fusebox where I will talk about this particular issue in more detail. > I recommend you take a look at Hal Helms work > http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm as CFMX > and > Fusebox are melded to form the next iteration of Fusebox. I was a little surprised to see this link posted publicly - I gave a very brief overview of Fusebox MX to BACFUG a few months back under a strict assurance to Hal that I didn't publish the code or the presentation. I can't find any mention of Fusebox MX on his site nor any links to this presentation. Without some context, it's a little hard for most people to follow I suspect (Hal did a great preso at DevCon in the Community Suite on this). 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: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question
Heh! Don't think I could get away with that at work though :) >> Adam wrote: "Plus, everyone has their own preferred "home grown" method " AKA: FuseBastard H. > -Original Message- > From: Mark A. Kruger - CFG [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 1:41 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > > Adam, > > There's one called "CF Objects" I believe. Plus, everyone has their > own preferred "home grown" method - everyone who's done more than one > project requiring high level CF code that is. > > -Mark > > > > -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:17 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > > > " Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for > developing ColdFusion Applications" > > What other Framework/Methodologies exist for Cold Fusion? > > Is the fuseBox framework/methodology decided by a consortium? Or by a > few elite people? > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:09 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > > As far as I understand it Hal Helms is no longer on the Fusebox > committee, he was a founding member. I can tell you that he is still > very much involved with Fusebox and at the forefront of the Fusebox > iteration for ColdFusion MX just repeating here, you can see some of > his work in that regard here > http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm. > > Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for > developing ColdFusion Applications and as stated here is also being > looked at for ASP, > JSP and PHP development. There are rumblings that CFC's obviate the > need > for Fusebox, my feelings are that CFC's as of themselves do not answer > all > the application needs that Fusebox including Fusedocs (a documentation > capability) and FLiP (an application lifecycle methodology) answered. > > Many people are waiting to see what Fusebox for ColdFusion MX looks > like and I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash > developers about Fusebox as a methodology/framework for Flash > Application development. > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt, CTO > Webapper > Blog http://www.webapper.net > Web site http://www.webapper.com > Downey CA Office > 562.243.6255 > AIM - webappermb > > Web Application Specialists > > > -Original Message- > From: charlie griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:48 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Design Pattern Question > > > Scott Wilhelm writes: > > > This might be a stupid question, but what's Fusebox? (Sorry, I'm a > > newbie in the CF world) > > http://www.fusebox.org. > > it's a fairly popular design methodology (started with CF, and i > believe has been ported to PHP). > > Altho I understand that CFC's, now available in CFMX, kind of render > fusebox moot (disclaimer: i do not know fusebox...i do not know for > certain that fusebox is no longer 'worthwhile'...this is only > something that i have heard > in certain circles) :) > > charlie > > > > > > > > > SW > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones > > Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Cc: > > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > > > > > Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal > > Helms > > left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if > > not, > > why is this rumor floating around? > > > > Adam Wayne Lehman > > Web Systems Developer > > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > > Distance Education Division > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of > > procedural > > methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion ther
RE: Design Pattern Question
As Hal's business partner, I'm happy to confirm that Hal has not left
Fusebox; he is simply no longer involved in the Fusebox organization's
various committees. Real life beckons us all, particularly during
recessions. :)
John Quarto-vonTivadar
-Original Message-
From: Adrocknaphobia Jones
Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM
To: CF-Talk
Cc:
Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question
Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal
Helms
left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if
not,
why is this rumor floating around?
~|
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 was RE: Design Pattern Question
There are also books out on Fusebox "Discovering Fusebox 3" published by Techspedition (www.techspedition.com) which also has an eWorkbook that can be used with it to self-test your knowledge as you go along. "Fusebox: Developing ColdFusion applications" published by NewRiders. There is also "Fusebox: methodology and techniques" but that is now 3 years old and quite out of date -Original Message- From: Mosh Teitelbaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 4:40 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question There's also cfObjects (http://www.cfobjects.com/). My IE Favorites list has gotten unmanageable again and I can't find the links to the others I've bookmarked. Sheesh. As for FuseBox info, check out their site http://www.fusebox.org. -- Mosh Teitelbaum evoch, LLC Tel: (301) 625-9191 Fax: (301) 933-3651 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.evoch.com/ > -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 4:17 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > > > " Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for > developing ColdFusion Applications" > > What other Framework/Methodologies exist for Cold Fusion? > > Is the fuseBox framework/methodology decided by a consortium? Or by a > few elite people? > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:09 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > > As far as I understand it Hal Helms is no longer on the Fusebox > committee, he was a founding member. I can tell you that he is still > very much involved with Fusebox and at the forefront of the Fusebox > iteration for ColdFusion MX just repeating here, you can see some of > his work in that regard here > http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm. > > Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for > developing ColdFusion Applications and as stated here is also being > looked at for ASP, > JSP and PHP development. There are rumblings that CFC's obviate the > need > for Fusebox, my feelings are that CFC's as of themselves do not answer > all > the application needs that Fusebox including Fusedocs (a documentation > capability) and FLiP (an application lifecycle methodology) answered. > > Many people are waiting to see what Fusebox for ColdFusion MX looks > like and I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash > developers about Fusebox as a methodology/framework for Flash > Application development. > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt, CTO > Webapper > Blog http://www.webapper.net > Web site http://www.webapper.com > Downey CA Office > 562.243.6255 > AIM - webappermb > > Web Application Specialists > > > -Original Message- > From: charlie griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:48 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Design Pattern Question > > > Scott Wilhelm writes: > > > This might be a stupid question, but what's Fusebox? (Sorry, I'm a > > newbie in the CF world) > > http://www.fusebox.org. > > it's a fairly popular design methodology (started with CF, and i > believe has been ported to PHP). > > Altho I understand that CFC's, now available in CFMX, kind of render > fusebox moot (disclaimer: i do not know fusebox...i do not know for > certain that fusebox is no longer 'worthwhile'...this is only > something that i have heard > in certain circles) :) > > charlie > > > > > > > > > SW > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones > > Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Cc: > > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > > > > > Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal > > Helms > > left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if > > not, > > why is this rumor floating around? > > > > Adam Wayne Lehman > > Web Systems Developer > > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > > Distance Education Division > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM > > To: CF-Talk > >
RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question
Adam wrote: "Plus, everyone has their own preferred "home grown" method " AKA: FuseBastard H. > -Original Message- > From: Mark A. Kruger - CFG [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 1:41 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > > Adam, > > There's one called "CF Objects" I believe. Plus, everyone has their own > preferred "home grown" method - everyone who's done more than one project > requiring high level CF code that is. > > -Mark > > > > -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:17 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > > > " Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for > developing ColdFusion Applications" > > What other Framework/Methodologies exist for Cold Fusion? > > Is the fuseBox framework/methodology decided by a consortium? Or by a > few elite people? > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:09 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > > As far as I understand it Hal Helms is no longer on the Fusebox > committee, > he was a founding member. I can tell you that he is still very much > involved with Fusebox and at the forefront of the Fusebox iteration for > ColdFusion MX just repeating here, you can see some of his work in that > regard here > http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm. > > Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for > developing > ColdFusion Applications and as stated here is also being looked at for > ASP, > JSP and PHP development. There are rumblings that CFC's obviate the > need > for Fusebox, my feelings are that CFC's as of themselves do not answer > all > the application needs that Fusebox including Fusedocs (a documentation > capability) and FLiP (an application lifecycle methodology) answered. > > Many people are waiting to see what Fusebox for ColdFusion MX looks like > and > I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash developers about > Fusebox as a methodology/framework for Flash Application development. > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt, CTO > Webapper > Blog http://www.webapper.net > Web site http://www.webapper.com > Downey CA Office > 562.243.6255 > AIM - webappermb > > Web Application Specialists > > > -Original Message- > From: charlie griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:48 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Design Pattern Question > > > Scott Wilhelm writes: > > > This might be a stupid question, but what's Fusebox? (Sorry, I'm a > > newbie in the CF world) > > http://www.fusebox.org. > > it's a fairly popular design methodology (started with CF, and i believe > has > been ported to PHP). > > Altho I understand that CFC's, now available in CFMX, kind of render > fusebox > moot (disclaimer: i do not know fusebox...i do not know for certain that > fusebox is no longer 'worthwhile'...this is only something that i have > heard > in certain circles) :) > > charlie > > > > > > > > > SW > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones > > Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Cc: > > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > > > > > Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal > > Helms > > left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if > > not, > > why is this rumor floating around? > > > > Adam Wayne Lehman > > Web Systems Developer > > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > > Distance Education Division > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of > > procedural > > methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion > > there is a > > further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has
RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question
There's also cfObjects (http://www.cfobjects.com/). My IE Favorites list has gotten unmanageable again and I can't find the links to the others I've bookmarked. Sheesh. As for FuseBox info, check out their site http://www.fusebox.org. -- Mosh Teitelbaum evoch, LLC Tel: (301) 625-9191 Fax: (301) 933-3651 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.evoch.com/ > -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 4:17 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > > > " Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for > developing ColdFusion Applications" > > What other Framework/Methodologies exist for Cold Fusion? > > Is the fuseBox framework/methodology decided by a consortium? Or by a > few elite people? > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:09 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > > As far as I understand it Hal Helms is no longer on the Fusebox > committee, > he was a founding member. I can tell you that he is still very much > involved with Fusebox and at the forefront of the Fusebox iteration for > ColdFusion MX just repeating here, you can see some of his work in that > regard here > http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm. > > Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for > developing > ColdFusion Applications and as stated here is also being looked at for > ASP, > JSP and PHP development. There are rumblings that CFC's obviate the > need > for Fusebox, my feelings are that CFC's as of themselves do not answer > all > the application needs that Fusebox including Fusedocs (a documentation > capability) and FLiP (an application lifecycle methodology) answered. > > Many people are waiting to see what Fusebox for ColdFusion MX looks like > and > I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash developers about > Fusebox as a methodology/framework for Flash Application development. > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt, CTO > Webapper > Blog http://www.webapper.net > Web site http://www.webapper.com > Downey CA Office > 562.243.6255 > AIM - webappermb > > Web Application Specialists > > > -Original Message- > From: charlie griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:48 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Design Pattern Question > > > Scott Wilhelm writes: > > > This might be a stupid question, but what's Fusebox? (Sorry, I'm a > > newbie in the CF world) > > http://www.fusebox.org. > > it's a fairly popular design methodology (started with CF, and i believe > has > been ported to PHP). > > Altho I understand that CFC's, now available in CFMX, kind of render > fusebox > moot (disclaimer: i do not know fusebox...i do not know for certain that > fusebox is no longer 'worthwhile'...this is only something that i have > heard > in certain circles) :) > > charlie > > > > > > > > > SW > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones > > Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Cc: > > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > > > > > Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal > > Helms > > left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if > > not, > > why is this rumor floating around? > > > > Adam Wayne Lehman > > Web Systems Developer > > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > > Distance Education Division > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of > > procedural > > methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion > > there is a > > further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has done for us, > > that I have > > not > > yet seen expounded in CFMX tutorials etc. > > > > Using Fusebox in conjunction with FLIP we have a complete > > application > > design > > and development enviro
RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question
Adam, There's one called "CF Objects" I believe. Plus, everyone has their own preferred "home grown" method - everyone who's done more than one project requiring high level CF code that is. -Mark -Original Message- From: Adrocknaphobia Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:17 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question " Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for developing ColdFusion Applications" What other Framework/Methodologies exist for Cold Fusion? Is the fuseBox framework/methodology decided by a consortium? Or by a few elite people? Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:09 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question As far as I understand it Hal Helms is no longer on the Fusebox committee, he was a founding member. I can tell you that he is still very much involved with Fusebox and at the forefront of the Fusebox iteration for ColdFusion MX just repeating here, you can see some of his work in that regard here http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm. Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for developing ColdFusion Applications and as stated here is also being looked at for ASP, JSP and PHP development. There are rumblings that CFC's obviate the need for Fusebox, my feelings are that CFC's as of themselves do not answer all the application needs that Fusebox including Fusedocs (a documentation capability) and FLiP (an application lifecycle methodology) answered. Many people are waiting to see what Fusebox for ColdFusion MX looks like and I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash developers about Fusebox as a methodology/framework for Flash Application development. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt, CTO Webapper Blog http://www.webapper.net Web site http://www.webapper.com Downey CA Office 562.243.6255 AIM - webappermb Web Application Specialists -Original Message- From: charlie griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:48 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Design Pattern Question Scott Wilhelm writes: > This might be a stupid question, but what's Fusebox? (Sorry, I'm a > newbie in the CF world) http://www.fusebox.org. it's a fairly popular design methodology (started with CF, and i believe has been ported to PHP). Altho I understand that CFC's, now available in CFMX, kind of render fusebox moot (disclaimer: i do not know fusebox...i do not know for certain that fusebox is no longer 'worthwhile'...this is only something that i have heard in certain circles) :) charlie > > SW > > -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones > Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM > To: CF-Talk > Cc: > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal > Helms > left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if > not, > why is this rumor floating around? > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of > procedural > methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion > there is a > further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has done for us, > that I have > not > yet seen expounded in CFMX tutorials etc. > > Using Fusebox in conjunction with FLIP we have a complete > application > design > and development environment from concept-discussion through > coding-ongoing > maintenance. In addition by using Fusebox we have found it easy > to > bring in > developers who had never coded on CF before but who had a good > grasp of > HTML, JavaScript and/or ASP-JSP. Further by abstracting the > actual > Fuseaction values till run-time Fusebox truly affords the > capability at > another layer of separation, that of separating design from > development; > when combined with the very descriptive capabilities afforded by > the use > of > Fusedocs. Finally, the logicality of using Circuits as a > mapping/pathing > mechanism addresses to p
RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question
The Fusebox methodology is created/modified/evolved by hundreds of people in the FB community. Throw your hat into the ring if you like! Greg -Original Message- From: Adrocknaphobia Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 4:17 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question " Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for developing ColdFusion Applications" What other Framework/Methodologies exist for Cold Fusion? Is the fuseBox framework/methodology decided by a consortium? Or by a few elite people? Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:09 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question As far as I understand it Hal Helms is no longer on the Fusebox committee, he was a founding member. I can tell you that he is still very much involved with Fusebox and at the forefront of the Fusebox iteration for ColdFusion MX just repeating here, you can see some of his work in that regard here http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm. Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for developing ColdFusion Applications and as stated here is also being looked at for ASP, JSP and PHP development. There are rumblings that CFC's obviate the need for Fusebox, my feelings are that CFC's as of themselves do not answer all the application needs that Fusebox including Fusedocs (a documentation capability) and FLiP (an application lifecycle methodology) answered. Many people are waiting to see what Fusebox for ColdFusion MX looks like and I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash developers about Fusebox as a methodology/framework for Flash Application development. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt, CTO Webapper Blog http://www.webapper.net Web site http://www.webapper.com Downey CA Office 562.243.6255 AIM - webappermb Web Application Specialists -Original Message- From: charlie griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:48 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Design Pattern Question Scott Wilhelm writes: > This might be a stupid question, but what's Fusebox? (Sorry, I'm a > newbie in the CF world) http://www.fusebox.org. it's a fairly popular design methodology (started with CF, and i believe has been ported to PHP). Altho I understand that CFC's, now available in CFMX, kind of render fusebox moot (disclaimer: i do not know fusebox...i do not know for certain that fusebox is no longer 'worthwhile'...this is only something that i have heard in certain circles) :) charlie > > SW > > -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones > Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM > To: CF-Talk > Cc: > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal > Helms > left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if > not, > why is this rumor floating around? > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of > procedural > methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion > there is a > further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has done for us, > that I have > not > yet seen expounded in CFMX tutorials etc. > > Using Fusebox in conjunction with FLIP we have a complete > application > design > and development environment from concept-discussion through > coding-ongoing > maintenance. In addition by using Fusebox we have found it easy > to > bring in > developers who had never coded on CF before but who had a good > grasp of > HTML, JavaScript and/or ASP-JSP. Further by abstracting the > actual > Fuseaction values till run-time Fusebox truly affords the > capability at > another layer of separation, that of separating design from > development; > when combined with the very descriptive capabilities afforded by > the use > of > Fusedocs. Finally, the logicality of using Circuits as a > mapping/pathing > mechanism addresses to physical layout questions of developing a > web > application. > >
RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question
There was actually a move to create something called Flashbox, those discussions took place around 6-8 months ago but in fairness did seem to fizzle out although there are still references to it here http://www.topica.com/lists/flashbox/. No doubts there is always talk in Fusebox circles about MVC and Hal Helms has something relating to that here http://halhelms.com/writings/mvc.htm. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt, CTO Webapper Blog http://www.webapper.net Web site http://www.webapper.com Downey CA Office 562.243.6255 AIM - webappermb Web Application Specialists -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 12:34 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash > developers about Fusebox as a methodology/framework for > Flash Application development. Really? I'd have to take issue with that. Most Flash developers I've met are much more interested in typical OOP development framework ideas, such as Model-View-Controller or Model-View-Presenter. Most also don't know CF, either. 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: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question
" Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for developing ColdFusion Applications" What other Framework/Methodologies exist for Cold Fusion? Is the fuseBox framework/methodology decided by a consortium? Or by a few elite people? Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:09 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question As far as I understand it Hal Helms is no longer on the Fusebox committee, he was a founding member. I can tell you that he is still very much involved with Fusebox and at the forefront of the Fusebox iteration for ColdFusion MX just repeating here, you can see some of his work in that regard here http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm. Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for developing ColdFusion Applications and as stated here is also being looked at for ASP, JSP and PHP development. There are rumblings that CFC's obviate the need for Fusebox, my feelings are that CFC's as of themselves do not answer all the application needs that Fusebox including Fusedocs (a documentation capability) and FLiP (an application lifecycle methodology) answered. Many people are waiting to see what Fusebox for ColdFusion MX looks like and I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash developers about Fusebox as a methodology/framework for Flash Application development. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt, CTO Webapper Blog http://www.webapper.net Web site http://www.webapper.com Downey CA Office 562.243.6255 AIM - webappermb Web Application Specialists -Original Message- From: charlie griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:48 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Design Pattern Question Scott Wilhelm writes: > This might be a stupid question, but what's Fusebox? (Sorry, I'm a > newbie in the CF world) http://www.fusebox.org. it's a fairly popular design methodology (started with CF, and i believe has been ported to PHP). Altho I understand that CFC's, now available in CFMX, kind of render fusebox moot (disclaimer: i do not know fusebox...i do not know for certain that fusebox is no longer 'worthwhile'...this is only something that i have heard in certain circles) :) charlie > > SW > > -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones > Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM > To: CF-Talk > Cc: > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal > Helms > left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if > not, > why is this rumor floating around? > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of > procedural > methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion > there is a > further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has done for us, > that I have > not > yet seen expounded in CFMX tutorials etc. > > Using Fusebox in conjunction with FLIP we have a complete > application > design > and development environment from concept-discussion through > coding-ongoing > maintenance. In addition by using Fusebox we have found it easy > to > bring in > developers who had never coded on CF before but who had a good > grasp of > HTML, JavaScript and/or ASP-JSP. Further by abstracting the > actual > Fuseaction values till run-time Fusebox truly affords the > capability at > another layer of separation, that of separating design from > development; > when combined with the very descriptive capabilities afforded by > the use > of > Fusedocs. Finally, the logicality of using Circuits as a > mapping/pathing > mechanism addresses to physical layout questions of developing a > web > application. > > There is one last very important point here, there have been > many > previous > methodologies/frameworks applied to ColdFusion development. > What is > different in Fusebox is it has become the most widely used of > all of > them > and that is a very considerable factor for
RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question
There is some interest in adopting Fusebox to Flash (the idea is called Flashbox), although the source of it seems to be existing CF Fusebox developers looking for a way of working with Flash. I can say there is not nearly the level of interest in Flashbox as there is in just straight OOP programming, judging from the reactions of Flash developers I know. There has been a Flashbox mailing list for about a year now, and I have seen some projects where ideas like this were implemented with varying degrees of success. The ideas could be a little more fleshed out... M -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:34 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question > I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash > developers about Fusebox as a methodology/framework for > Flash Application development. Really? I'd have to take issue with that. Most Flash developers I've met are much more interested in typical OOP development framework ideas, such as Model-View-Controller or Model-View-Presenter. Most also don't know CF, either. 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 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 was RE: Design Pattern Question
> I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash > developers about Fusebox as a methodology/framework for > Flash Application development. Really? I'd have to take issue with that. Most Flash developers I've met are much more interested in typical OOP development framework ideas, such as Model-View-Controller or Model-View-Presenter. Most also don't know CF, either. 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
Re: Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question
At 12:08 PM 1/13/2003, you wrote: >I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash developers about >Fusebox as a methodology/framework for Flash Application development. Really? I've never seen anything indicating this--I'd be interested in reading the archives. Where was it discussed? Flash has largely adopted MVC (and Fusebox is really an implementation of MVC, isn't it?). ~| 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. Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Fusebox was RE: Design Pattern Question
As far as I understand it Hal Helms is no longer on the Fusebox committee, he was a founding member. I can tell you that he is still very much involved with Fusebox and at the forefront of the Fusebox iteration for ColdFusion MX just repeating here, you can see some of his work in that regard here http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm. Fusebox is the most widely distributed Framework/Methodology for developing ColdFusion Applications and as stated here is also being looked at for ASP, JSP and PHP development. There are rumblings that CFC's obviate the need for Fusebox, my feelings are that CFC's as of themselves do not answer all the application needs that Fusebox including Fusedocs (a documentation capability) and FLiP (an application lifecycle methodology) answered. Many people are waiting to see what Fusebox for ColdFusion MX looks like and I also know that there is a lot of interest among Flash developers about Fusebox as a methodology/framework for Flash Application development. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt, CTO Webapper Blog http://www.webapper.net Web site http://www.webapper.com Downey CA Office 562.243.6255 AIM - webappermb Web Application Specialists -Original Message- From: charlie griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 11:48 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Design Pattern Question Scott Wilhelm writes: > This might be a stupid question, but what's Fusebox? (Sorry, I'm a > newbie in the CF world) http://www.fusebox.org. it's a fairly popular design methodology (started with CF, and i believe has been ported to PHP). Altho I understand that CFC's, now available in CFMX, kind of render fusebox moot (disclaimer: i do not know fusebox...i do not know for certain that fusebox is no longer 'worthwhile'...this is only something that i have heard in certain circles) :) charlie > > SW > > -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones > Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM > To: CF-Talk > Cc: > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal > Helms > left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if > not, > why is this rumor floating around? > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of > procedural > methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion > there is a > further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has done for us, > that I have > not > yet seen expounded in CFMX tutorials etc. > > Using Fusebox in conjunction with FLIP we have a complete > application > design > and development environment from concept-discussion through > coding-ongoing > maintenance. In addition by using Fusebox we have found it easy > to > bring in > developers who had never coded on CF before but who had a good > grasp of > HTML, JavaScript and/or ASP-JSP. Further by abstracting the > actual > Fuseaction values till run-time Fusebox truly affords the > capability at > another layer of separation, that of separating design from > development; > when combined with the very descriptive capabilities afforded by > the use > of > Fusedocs. Finally, the logicality of using Circuits as a > mapping/pathing > mechanism addresses to physical layout questions of developing a > web > application. > > There is one last very important point here, there have been > many > previous > methodologies/frameworks applied to ColdFusion development. > What is > different in Fusebox is it has become the most widely used of > all of > them > and that is a very considerable factor for those of us using > teams of > developers that can change, grow, shrink etc. > > I recommend you take a look at Hal Helms work > http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm as > CFMX > and > Fusebox are melded to form the next iteration of Fusebox. > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt > Webapper Services LLC > Web Site http://www.webapper.com > Blog http://www.webapper.net > > Webapper > > -Original Message
Re: Design Pattern Question
On Monday, Jan 13, 2003, at 11:47 US/Pacific, charlie griefer wrote: > it's a fairly popular design methodology (started with CF, and i > believe has > been ported to PHP). Yes, my personal site is a PHP Fusebox site (and I will be writing up my experience in converting it). > Altho I understand that CFC's, now available in CFMX, kind of render > fusebox > moot (disclaimer: i do not know fusebox...i do not know for certain > that > fusebox is no longer 'worthwhile'...this is only something that i have > heard > in certain circles) :) Hope you have your asbestos suit on? :) CFCs do not render Fusebox moot. CFCs can be used from Fusebox quite happily. Hal Helms is working on a new version of Fusebox (Fusebox MX) that makes extensive use of CFCs. 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 Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Design Pattern Question
Scott Wilhelm writes: > This might be a stupid question, but what's Fusebox? (Sorry, I'm a > newbie in the CF world) http://www.fusebox.org. it's a fairly popular design methodology (started with CF, and i believe has been ported to PHP). Altho I understand that CFC's, now available in CFMX, kind of render fusebox moot (disclaimer: i do not know fusebox...i do not know for certain that fusebox is no longer 'worthwhile'...this is only something that i have heard in certain circles) :) charlie > > SW > > -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia Jones > Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM > To: CF-Talk > Cc: > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > > > Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal > Helms > left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if > not, > why is this rumor floating around? > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of > procedural > methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion > there is a > further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has done for us, > that I have > not > yet seen expounded in CFMX tutorials etc. > > Using Fusebox in conjunction with FLIP we have a complete > application > design > and development environment from concept-discussion through > coding-ongoing > maintenance. In addition by using Fusebox we have found it easy > to > bring in > developers who had never coded on CF before but who had a good > grasp of > HTML, JavaScript and/or ASP-JSP. Further by abstracting the > actual > Fuseaction values till run-time Fusebox truly affords the > capability at > another layer of separation, that of separating design from > development; > when combined with the very descriptive capabilities afforded by > the use > of > Fusedocs. Finally, the logicality of using Circuits as a > mapping/pathing > mechanism addresses to physical layout questions of developing a > web > application. > > There is one last very important point here, there have been > many > previous > methodologies/frameworks applied to ColdFusion development. > What is > different in Fusebox is it has become the most widely used of > all of > them > and that is a very considerable factor for those of us using > teams of > developers that can change, grow, shrink etc. > > I recommend you take a look at Hal Helms work > http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm as > CFMX > and > Fusebox are melded to form the next iteration of Fusebox. > > Kind Regards - Mike Brunt > Webapper Services LLC > Web Site http://www.webapper.com > Blog http://www.webapper.net > > Webapper > > -Original Message- > From: Peter Bagnato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 6:38 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question > > I think that this is a very healthy design methodology for CF. > > Ben Forta has been harping for ages about the importance of > separating > the > display, application, and data layers from the CF applications. > > The methodology outlined in that page presents this to the CF > environment. > > It actually follows many of the well known and widely used J2EE > methodologies out there. That was something that always bugged > me about > FuseBox and other methodologies presented for CF. > > Those are just my thoughts: > Peter Bagnato > > > -Original Message- > From: Cutter (CF_Talk) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 11:59 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Design Pattern Question > > Has anyone here taken a detailed look at the CFMX (semi) OOP > design > pattern put forth at http://www.benorama.com? Is
RE: Design Pattern Question
This might be a stupid question, but what's Fusebox? (Sorry, I'm a
newbie in the CF world)
SW
-Original Message-
From: Adrocknaphobia Jones
Sent: Mon 01/13/2003 02:22 PM
To: CF-Talk
Cc:
Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question
Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal
Helms
left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if
not,
why is this rumor floating around?
Adam Wayne Lehman
Web Systems Developer
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Distance Education Division
-Original Message-
From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question
Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of
procedural
methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion
there is a
further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has done for us,
that I have
not
yet seen expounded in CFMX tutorials etc.
Using Fusebox in conjunction with FLIP we have a complete
application
design
and development environment from concept-discussion through
coding-ongoing
maintenance. In addition by using Fusebox we have found it easy
to
bring in
developers who had never coded on CF before but who had a good
grasp of
HTML, JavaScript and/or ASP-JSP. Further by abstracting the
actual
Fuseaction values till run-time Fusebox truly affords the
capability at
another layer of separation, that of separating design from
development;
when combined with the very descriptive capabilities afforded by
the use
of
Fusedocs. Finally, the logicality of using Circuits as a
mapping/pathing
mechanism addresses to physical layout questions of developing a
web
application.
There is one last very important point here, there have been
many
previous
methodologies/frameworks applied to ColdFusion development.
What is
different in Fusebox is it has become the most widely used of
all of
them
and that is a very considerable factor for those of us using
teams of
developers that can change, grow, shrink etc.
I recommend you take a look at Hal Helms work
http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm as
CFMX
and
Fusebox are melded to form the next iteration of Fusebox.
Kind Regards - Mike Brunt
Webapper Services LLC
Web Site http://www.webapper.com
Blog http://www.webapper.net
Webapper
-Original Message-
From: Peter Bagnato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 6:38 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question
I think that this is a very healthy design methodology for CF.
Ben Forta has been harping for ages about the importance of
separating
the
display, application, and data layers from the CF applications.
The methodology outlined in that page presents this to the CF
environment.
It actually follows many of the well known and widely used J2EE
methodologies out there. That was something that always bugged
me about
FuseBox and other methodologies presented for CF.
Those are just my thoughts:
Peter Bagnato
-Original Message-
From: Cutter (CF_Talk) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 11:59 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Design Pattern Question
Has anyone here taken a detailed look at the CFMX (semi) OOP
design
pattern put forth at http://www.benorama.com? Is anyone here
using it?
Formed some opinions? Have anything to add (or subtract)? Know
who put
this together in the first place?
As one of my former commanders used to ask "Questions? Comments?
War
Stories?"
Cutter
~|
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: Design Pattern Question
Not one to start gossip, but I was under the influence that Hal Helms left the fusebox group. Is this true? If so why did he leave, if not, why is this rumor floating around? Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 12:13 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of procedural methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion there is a further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has done for us, that I have not yet seen expounded in CFMX tutorials etc. Using Fusebox in conjunction with FLIP we have a complete application design and development environment from concept-discussion through coding-ongoing maintenance. In addition by using Fusebox we have found it easy to bring in developers who had never coded on CF before but who had a good grasp of HTML, JavaScript and/or ASP-JSP. Further by abstracting the actual Fuseaction values till run-time Fusebox truly affords the capability at another layer of separation, that of separating design from development; when combined with the very descriptive capabilities afforded by the use of Fusedocs. Finally, the logicality of using Circuits as a mapping/pathing mechanism addresses to physical layout questions of developing a web application. There is one last very important point here, there have been many previous methodologies/frameworks applied to ColdFusion development. What is different in Fusebox is it has become the most widely used of all of them and that is a very considerable factor for those of us using teams of developers that can change, grow, shrink etc. I recommend you take a look at Hal Helms work http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm as CFMX and Fusebox are melded to form the next iteration of Fusebox. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Webapper Services LLC Web Site http://www.webapper.com Blog http://www.webapper.net Webapper -Original Message- From: Peter Bagnato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 6:38 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question I think that this is a very healthy design methodology for CF. Ben Forta has been harping for ages about the importance of separating the display, application, and data layers from the CF applications. The methodology outlined in that page presents this to the CF environment. It actually follows many of the well known and widely used J2EE methodologies out there. That was something that always bugged me about FuseBox and other methodologies presented for CF. Those are just my thoughts: Peter Bagnato -Original Message- From: Cutter (CF_Talk) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 11:59 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Design Pattern Question Has anyone here taken a detailed look at the CFMX (semi) OOP design pattern put forth at http://www.benorama.com? Is anyone here using it? Formed some opinions? Have anything to add (or subtract)? Know who put this together in the first place? As one of my former commanders used to ask "Questions? Comments? War Stories?" Cutter ~| 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: Design Pattern Question
> Using Fusebox in conjunction with FLIP we have a complete application design > and development environment from concept-discussion through coding-ongoing > maintenance. > > There is one last very important point here, there have been many previous > methodologies/frameworks applied to ColdFusion development. What is > different in Fusebox is it has become the most widely used of all of them > and that is a very considerable factor for those of us using teams of > developers that can change, grow, shrink etc. > Mike makes good points, but one of the key distinctions is that of *methodology* vs. *framework*. No question that Fusebox is a usefull framework (though one could argue it's incomplete since it's missing things like security, etc. That's a separate point). and that FLIP is a useful methodology. Methodologies can be religious wars -- XP vs RUP vs FLIP vs Agile vs whatever. I think most people take the useful parts and synthesize their own. Really good design/dev teams do this explicitly (e.g. we'll take A from XP and B, C, and D from FLIP, but also integrate E from RUP and this other cool methodology I like) Frameworks, which have their own religious wars, IMHO are much easier to judge on technical merits than methodologies (which can only be truly measured by results). In the Java world, there's Struts. There's velocity/turbine/torque. There's others, I certainly don't have the definitive list! But in the ASP/CF/PHP world, there's not really any solid frameworks other than Fusebox. And I like the way the new FB is headed -- it is much more of a framework than a set of guidelines (like FB2 basically was). MM's produced some pretty cool tools/services for building more robut frameworks in CF. I think the stuff at benorama is cool, but it's not really a framework (it's sorta like FB2 in that it's guidelines and a few tools). Fusebox has certainly become a defacto standard for CF frameworks, which is a good thing. But just like the Java world has room for several different frameworks, so does the CF world. Looking forward to seeing what's coming down the pike this year :) Regards, John Paul Ashenfelter CTO/Transitionpoint [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 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
Design Pattern Question
Hi everyone,
Thanks for all the positive feedbacks on benorama.com ColdFusion content.
The articles I've put online are a set of "Best practices" and general design
techniques that I daily used for advanced CFMX application development (in our
company, a collaborative plate-form).
They are certainly not perfect (it is not 100% MVC on the controller part) but they
work very well.
The idea is that you can take whatever you like and adapt them to your needs.
I should add some more details on my use of CFCs, but I haven't updated the site since
august 2002...
For the moment, here it is on CF-Talk.
I usually create :
- Entity CFCs that correspond to physical persistent entity (usually a single row in
one or several database tables).
they inherits from a base Entity.cfc with "init" and "getProperties" methods,
they usually have at least "load", "create", "store" and "remove" methods,
Ex. :
newsEntityInstance = createObject("component","com.mycompany.news.NewsEntity");
newsEntityInstance.load(1011);
newsEntityInstance.title = "I have changed the title";
// or newsEntityInstance.setTitle("I have changed the title"); // if you
create setter/getter functions for each properties
newsEntityInstance.store();
- Utility CFCs that encapsulate generic business logic and are not persistent and
stateless.
Ex. :
newsUtility = createObject("component","com.mycompany.news.NewsUtility");
lastNewsRecordSet = newsUtility.getLastNews();
- Session CFCs that act as a facade to handle the client session (statefull).
Ex. :
...
This is how I use CFCs for a 100% ColdFusion-based application, but if you have good
J2EE skills in your team and if it is required, you might replace those CFCs by EJBs
(with all their pros and cons...).
Last month, I also spent some time to try to establish methodologies/best practices
for complex Flash MX application development : how to nicely apply MVC to Flash MX and
Flash remoting.
Right now, I used facade CFCs on the server side and ActionScript "proxy" class on the
client side, encapsulated in Flash components.
Each Flash components correspond more or less to a CF "pagelet".
But Flash components are not only a "View" with some "Model" calls to get content,
they integrate the full MVC pattern and use at least four ActionScript class (per
component) :
- a View class that dynamically display the content and set the layout,
- a Model class to hold the data of the component,
- a Controller class (the Broadcaster class based on the events listener/broadcaster
mechanism),
- a Service class to call the server components through one or several facade CFCs
(the only CFCs with a "remote" access),
- the main component class that contains and uses all those classes.
But I am still not completely happy with that (pretty complex to develop and to
maintain).
I am going to re-work on it when I'll have sometimes during the following months.
As soon as I have got something more "clear and elegant", I'll put in online in the
Flash section of benorama.com.
Any feedbacks or suggestions on all those stuffs (ColdFusion or Flash) are welcome!
Benoit Hediard
www.benorama.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: Design Pattern Question
On Saturday, Jan 11, 2003, at 20:58 US/Pacific, Cutter (CF_Talk) wrote: > Has anyone here taken a detailed look at the CFMX (semi) OOP design > pattern put forth at http://www.benorama.com? Is anyone here using it? > Formed some opinions? Have anything to add (or subtract)? Know who put > this together in the first place? It was written by Benoit Hedard. I blogged a review of it over xmas: http://www.corfield.org/blog/2002_12_01_archive.html#86606119 It has a lot of interesting ideas in it that would help you build MVC-style applications. My team uses OO design patterns extensively as we rebuild macromedia.com. I published an article scratching the surface of that: http://www.macromedia.com/desdev/articles/facades.html > As one of my former commanders used to ask "Questions? Comments? War > Stories?" We've found the application of OO design patterns to CFMX to be very helpful in structuring our applications. Sean A Corfield -- Director, Architecture Web Technology Group -- Macromedia, Inc. tel: (415) 252-2287 -- cell: (415) 717-8473 aim/iChat: seancorfield -- http://www.macromedia.com An Architect's View -- http://www.macromedia.com/go/arch_blog ColdFusion MX and JRun 4 now available for Mac OS X! http://www.macromedia.com/go/cfmxosx ~| 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: Design Pattern Question
Yes this is a good methodology to consider as we all move out of procedural methodologies to more 'OO' based concepts. Yet in my opinion there is a further dimension that Fusebox achieves, or has done for us, that I have not yet seen expounded in CFMX tutorials etc. Using Fusebox in conjunction with FLIP we have a complete application design and development environment from concept-discussion through coding-ongoing maintenance. In addition by using Fusebox we have found it easy to bring in developers who had never coded on CF before but who had a good grasp of HTML, JavaScript and/or ASP-JSP. Further by abstracting the actual Fuseaction values till run-time Fusebox truly affords the capability at another layer of separation, that of separating design from development; when combined with the very descriptive capabilities afforded by the use of Fusedocs. Finally, the logicality of using Circuits as a mapping/pathing mechanism addresses to physical layout questions of developing a web application. There is one last very important point here, there have been many previous methodologies/frameworks applied to ColdFusion development. What is different in Fusebox is it has become the most widely used of all of them and that is a very considerable factor for those of us using teams of developers that can change, grow, shrink etc. I recommend you take a look at Hal Helms work http://www.halhelms.com/webresources/fuseboxmxpreso/page1.htm as CFMX and Fusebox are melded to form the next iteration of Fusebox. Kind Regards - Mike Brunt Webapper Services LLC Web Site http://www.webapper.com Blog http://www.webapper.net Webapper -Original Message- From: Peter Bagnato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 6:38 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Design Pattern Question I think that this is a very healthy design methodology for CF. Ben Forta has been harping for ages about the importance of separating the display, application, and data layers from the CF applications. The methodology outlined in that page presents this to the CF environment. It actually follows many of the well known and widely used J2EE methodologies out there. That was something that always bugged me about FuseBox and other methodologies presented for CF. Those are just my thoughts: Peter Bagnato -Original Message- From: Cutter (CF_Talk) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 11:59 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Design Pattern Question Has anyone here taken a detailed look at the CFMX (semi) OOP design pattern put forth at http://www.benorama.com? Is anyone here using it? Formed some opinions? Have anything to add (or subtract)? Know who put this together in the first place? As one of my former commanders used to ask "Questions? Comments? War Stories?" Cutter ~| 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: Design Pattern Question
I think that this is a very healthy design methodology for CF. Ben Forta has been harping for ages about the importance of separating the display, application, and data layers from the CF applications. The methodology outlined in that page presents this to the CF environment. It actually follows many of the well known and widely used J2EE methodologies out there. That was something that always bugged me about FuseBox and other methodologies presented for CF. Those are just my thoughts: Peter Bagnato -Original Message- From: Cutter (CF_Talk) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 11:59 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Design Pattern Question Has anyone here taken a detailed look at the CFMX (semi) OOP design pattern put forth at http://www.benorama.com? Is anyone here using it? Formed some opinions? Have anything to add (or subtract)? Know who put this together in the first place? As one of my former commanders used to ask "Questions? Comments? War Stories?" Cutter ~| 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
Design Pattern Question
Has anyone here taken a detailed look at the CFMX (semi) OOP design pattern put forth at http://www.benorama.com? Is anyone here using it? Formed some opinions? Have anything to add (or subtract)? Know who put this together in the first place? As one of my former commanders used to ask "Questions? Comments? War Stories?" Cutter ~| 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
