Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Damon, This is great! We appreciate that Allaire is working with CF developers. -David Shadovitz On Wed, 27 Sep 2000 08:50:44 -0400 Damon Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Folks, > > ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get > your > feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > > While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and performance > issues > (across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many > serious > feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be > significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > > Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > > 18965 Native Oracle CLOB support > 18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of > Security Proxy > 17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support > 15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 > characters > 18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post failure (but redirects must > still be an > absolute url) > 18338, 17121 LSNumberFormat and NumberFormat problems > 16663 MIME attached over regular WAP gateway > (UTF-8). > 19010 CFFILE/move problem on Unix file > systems > 17601 COM Threading Model Changes > 18311 CFHTTP 'Connection Failure' error if > the status code > is 204 > 18246 CFPOP unknown exception condition > 18811 POP3 enhancement > 18058, 16875 Applet interface in CFAdmin problems > with parm > fields > 18607 MSAccess bug hangs CF on Win2k/SP1 > 18579 Secuirty Administration Bug - cfm file > change > 17543 Locale Date Support - Solaris > 10115 European dates broken in Solaris CF > 4.5+ > 19003 CFFTP connection bug > 12523 Unix, LSParseDateTime only functions > for US english. > 18991 CFHTTP on Linux crash with >4k content > 18234, 17792 MS SQLServer problems on Linux > 18778 Scheduled tasks don't run with > CFREGISTRY disabled > > I can't promise anything, but this release is for you, and I want to > make > sure you're heard. Please either post to the list or send email > directly to > me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and reference your Allaire Issue/Bug # if > you have > one. > > Thanks > > Damon Cooper > ColdFusion Release Manager > Allaire YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Damon, I haven't seen this raised as an issue elsewhere so I'll mention it to you. It isn't so much something that is broken than a change in behaviour between 4.01 and 4.5 which had the effect of breaking some of our code which relied on the 4.01 behaviour. Note also that this change in behaviour wasn't mentioned in the release notes for 4.5 The problem: You may be aware that when calling custom tags, either using the "CF_" syntax, or using "CFMODULE", you can pass a special attribute called "ATTRIBUTECOLLECTION", which is a struct of attributes. We use it quite a lot when using optional parameters, as it allows a collection of parameters to be created, and then sent "en masse" to a module, e.g. In practice, you can mix and match "attributecollection" and standard parameters, e.g. which is entirely equivalent to, say, The change has come in how repeated variables are treated, e.g. Here X is specified twice, once in the attributecollection, once as a normal parameter. The problem (for me at least, moving code from 4.01 to 4.5) is that in 4.01 the "normal" parameter has precedence, whereas in 4.5 the "struct" parameter has precedence, resulting in: 4.01 4.5 Was there a reason for the initial change and if so, why was it done and why wasn't it documented? If not, can we have the original behaviour back please? :-) Regards, Steve Martin Allaire Certified Instructor (initially spotted by P.Murphy [ACI] ) > -Original Message- > From: Damon Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 13:51 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > Folks, > > ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get your > feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > > While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and performance issues > (across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many serious > feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be > significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > > Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > > 18965 Native Oracle CLOB support > 18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of Security Proxy > 17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support > 15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 characters > 18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post failure (but redirects must still be an > absolute url) > 18338, 17121 LSNumberFormat and NumberFormat problems > 16663 MIME attached over regular WAP gateway (UTF-8). > 19010 CFFILE/move problem on Unix file systems > 17601 COM Threading Model Changes > 18311 CFHTTP 'Connection Failure' error if the status code > is 204 > 18246 CFPOP unknown exception condition > 18811 POP3 enhancement > 18058, 16875 Applet interface in CFAdmin problems with parm > fields > 18607 MSAccess bug hangs CF on Win2k/SP1 > 18579 Secuirty Administration Bug - cfm file change > 17543 Locale Date Support - Solaris > 10115 European dates broken in Solaris CF 4.5+ > 19003 CFFTP connection bug > 12523 Unix, LSParseDateTime only functions for US english. > 18991 CFHTTP on Linux crash with >4k content > 18234, 17792 MS SQLServer problems on Linux > 18778 Scheduled tasks don't run with CFREGISTRY disabled > > I can't promise anything, but this release is for you, and I want to make > sure you're heard. Please either post to the list or send email > directly to > me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and reference your Allaire Issue/Bug # > if you have > one. > > Thanks > > Damon Cooper > ColdFusion Release Manager > Allaire > -- > > Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ > To Unsubscribe visit > http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf _talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Sorry to be a bit of a bore, but read his email. You should email him directly. > -- > From: Steve Martin[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 27 September 2000 14:22 > To: CF-Talk > Cc: Phil > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > Damon, > I haven't seen this raised as an issue elsewhere so I'll mention it to > you. > It isn't so much something that is broken than a change in behaviour > between > 4.01 and 4.5 which had the effect of breaking some of our code which > relied > on the 4.01 behaviour. Note also that this change in behaviour wasn't > mentioned in the release notes for 4.5 > The problem: > > You may be aware that when calling custom tags, either using the "CF_" > syntax, or using "CFMODULE", you can pass a special attribute called > "ATTRIBUTECOLLECTION", which is a struct of attributes. We use it quite a > lot when using optional parameters, as it allows a collection of > parameters > to be created, and then sent "en masse" to a module, e.g. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In practice, you can mix and match "attributecollection" and standard > parameters, e.g. > > > which is entirely equivalent to, say, > > > The change has come in how repeated variables are treated, e.g. > > > Here X is specified twice, once in the attributecollection, once as a > normal > parameter. > > The problem (for me at least, moving code from 4.01 to 4.5) is that in > 4.01 > the "normal" parameter has precedence, whereas in 4.5 the "struct" > parameter > has precedence, resulting in: > > 4.01 > 4.5 > > Was there a reason for the initial change and if so, why was it done and > why > wasn't it documented? If not, can we have the original behaviour back > please? :-) > > Regards, > Steve Martin > Allaire Certified Instructor > > (initially spotted by P.Murphy [ACI] ) > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Damon Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 13:51 > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > > > Folks, > > > > ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get > your > > feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > > > > While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and performance issues > > (across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many serious > > feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be > > significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > > > > Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > > > > 18965 Native Oracle CLOB support > > 18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of Security > Proxy > > 17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support > > 15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 > characters > > 18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post failure (but redirects must still be an > > absolute url) > > 18338, 17121LSNumberFormat and NumberFormat problems > > 16663 MIME attached over regular WAP gateway > (UTF-8). > > 19010 CFFILE/move problem on Unix file systems > > 17601 COM Threading Model Changes > > 18311 CFHTTP 'Connection Failure' error if the > status code > > is 204 > > 18246 CFPOP unknown exception condition > > 18811 POP3 enhancement > > 18058, 16875Applet interface in CFAdmin problems with > parm > > fields > > 18607 MSAccess bug hangs CF on Win2k/SP1 > > 18579 Secuirty Administration Bug - cfm file > change > > 17543 Locale Date Support - Solaris > > 10115 European dates broken in Solaris CF 4.5+ > > 19003 CFFTP connection bug > > 12523 Unix, LSParseDateTime only functions for US > english. > > 18991 CFHTTP on Linux crash with >4k content > > 18234, 17792MS SQLServer problems on Linux > > 18778 Scheduled tasks don't run with CFREGISTRY > disabled > > > > I ca
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Actually, he was right... > > I can't promise anything, but this release is for you, and I want to > make > > sure you're heard. Please either post to the list or send email > > directly to > > me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and reference your Allaire Issue/Bug # > > if you have > > one. But, read his email anyway. Heath -Original Message- From: Reynolds, Adam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 9:27 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input Sorry to be a bit of a bore, but read his email. You should email him directly. > -- > From: Steve Martin[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 27 September 2000 14:22 > To: CF-Talk > Cc: Phil > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > Damon, > I haven't seen this raised as an issue elsewhere so I'll mention it to > you. > It isn't so much something that is broken than a change in behaviour > between > 4.01 and 4.5 which had the effect of breaking some of our code which > relied > on the 4.01 behaviour. Note also that this change in behaviour wasn't > mentioned in the release notes for 4.5 > The problem: > > You may be aware that when calling custom tags, either using the "CF_" > syntax, or using "CFMODULE", you can pass a special attribute called > "ATTRIBUTECOLLECTION", which is a struct of attributes. We use it quite a > lot when using optional parameters, as it allows a collection of > parameters > to be created, and then sent "en masse" to a module, e.g. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In practice, you can mix and match "attributecollection" and standard > parameters, e.g. > > > which is entirely equivalent to, say, > > > The change has come in how repeated variables are treated, e.g. > > > Here X is specified twice, once in the attributecollection, once as a > normal > parameter. > > The problem (for me at least, moving code from 4.01 to 4.5) is that in > 4.01 > the "normal" parameter has precedence, whereas in 4.5 the "struct" > parameter > has precedence, resulting in: > > 4.01 > 4.5 > > Was there a reason for the initial change and if so, why was it done and > why > wasn't it documented? If not, can we have the original behaviour back > please? :-) > > Regards, > Steve Martin > Allaire Certified Instructor > > (initially spotted by P.Murphy [ACI] ) > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Damon Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 13:51 > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > > > Folks, > > > > ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get > your > > feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > > > > While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and performance issues > > (across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many serious > > feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be > > significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > > > > Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > > > > 18965 Native Oracle CLOB support > > 18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of Security > Proxy > > 17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support > > 15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 > characters > > 18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post failure (but redirects must still be an > > absolute url) > > 18338, 17121LSNumberFormat and NumberFormat problems > > 16663 MIME attached over regular WAP gateway > (UTF-8). > > 19010 CFFILE/move problem on Unix file systems > > 17601 COM Threading Model Changes > > 18311 CFHTTP 'Connection Failure' error if the > status code > > is 204 > > 18246 CFPOP unknown exception condition > > 18811 POP3 enhancement > > 18058, 16875Applet interface in CFAdmin problems with > parm > > fields > > 18607 MSAccess bug hangs CF on Win2k/SP1 > > 18579 Secuirty Administration Bug - cfm file > change > > 17543
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Dohapologies in the middle of a code crisis...scanned his email...during a 10 second break :) > -- > From: Heath Lord[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 27 September 2000 14:39 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > Actually, he was right... > > > > I can't promise anything, but this release is for you, and I want to > > make > > > sure you're heard. Please either post to the list or send email > > > directly to > > > me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and reference your Allaire Issue/Bug # > > > if you have > > > one. > > But, read his email anyway. > > Heath > > -Original Message- > From: Reynolds, Adam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 9:27 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > Sorry to be a bit of a bore, but read his email. You should email him > directly. > > > -- > > From: Steve Martin[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 27 September 2000 14:22 > > To: CF-Talk > > Cc: Phil > > Subject:RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > Damon, > > I haven't seen this raised as an issue elsewhere so I'll mention it to > > you. > > It isn't so much something that is broken than a change in behaviour > > between > > 4.01 and 4.5 which had the effect of breaking some of our code which > > relied > > on the 4.01 behaviour. Note also that this change in behaviour wasn't > > mentioned in the release notes for 4.5 > > The problem: > > > > You may be aware that when calling custom tags, either using the "CF_" > > syntax, or using "CFMODULE", you can pass a special attribute called > > "ATTRIBUTECOLLECTION", which is a struct of attributes. We use it quite > a > > lot when using optional parameters, as it allows a collection of > > parameters > > to be created, and then sent "en masse" to a module, e.g. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In practice, you can mix and match "attributecollection" and standard > > parameters, e.g. > > > > > > which is entirely equivalent to, say, > > > > > > The change has come in how repeated variables are treated, e.g. > > > > > > Here X is specified twice, once in the attributecollection, once as a > > normal > > parameter. > > > > The problem (for me at least, moving code from 4.01 to 4.5) is that in > > 4.01 > > the "normal" parameter has precedence, whereas in 4.5 the "struct" > > parameter > > has precedence, resulting in: > > > > 4.01 > > 4.5 > > > > Was there a reason for the initial change and if so, why was it done and > > why > > wasn't it documented? If not, can we have the original behaviour back > > please? :-) > > > > Regards, > > Steve Martin > > Allaire Certified Instructor > > > > (initially spotted by P.Murphy [ACI] ) > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Damon Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 13:51 > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Subject: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get > > your > > > feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > > > > > > While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and performance > issues > > > (across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many serious > > > feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be > > > significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > > > > > > Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > > > > > > 18965 Native Oracle CLOB support > > > 18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of Security > > Proxy > > > 17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support > > > 15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 > > characters > > > 18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post fa
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
hmmm you get breaks -Original Message- From: Reynolds, Adam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 27 September 2000 14:41 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input Dohapologies in the middle of a code crisis...scanned his email...during a 10 second break :) > -- > From: Heath Lord[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 27 September 2000 14:39 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > Actually, he was right... > > > > I can't promise anything, but this release is for you, and I want to > > make > > > sure you're heard. Please either post to the list or send email > > > directly to > > > me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and reference your Allaire Issue/Bug # > > > if you have > > > one. > > But, read his email anyway. > > Heath > > -Original Message- > From: Reynolds, Adam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 9:27 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > Sorry to be a bit of a bore, but read his email. You should email him > directly. > > > -- > > From: Steve Martin[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 27 September 2000 14:22 > > To: CF-Talk > > Cc: Phil > > Subject:RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > Damon, > > I haven't seen this raised as an issue elsewhere so I'll mention it to > > you. > > It isn't so much something that is broken than a change in behaviour > > between > > 4.01 and 4.5 which had the effect of breaking some of our code which > > relied > > on the 4.01 behaviour. Note also that this change in behaviour wasn't > > mentioned in the release notes for 4.5 > > The problem: > > > > You may be aware that when calling custom tags, either using the "CF_" > > syntax, or using "CFMODULE", you can pass a special attribute called > > "ATTRIBUTECOLLECTION", which is a struct of attributes. We use it quite > a > > lot when using optional parameters, as it allows a collection of > > parameters > > to be created, and then sent "en masse" to a module, e.g. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In practice, you can mix and match "attributecollection" and standard > > parameters, e.g. > > > > > > which is entirely equivalent to, say, > > > > > > The change has come in how repeated variables are treated, e.g. > > > > > > Here X is specified twice, once in the attributecollection, once as a > > normal > > parameter. > > > > The problem (for me at least, moving code from 4.01 to 4.5) is that in > > 4.01 > > the "normal" parameter has precedence, whereas in 4.5 the "struct" > > parameter > > has precedence, resulting in: > > > > 4.01 > > 4.5 > > > > Was there a reason for the initial change and if so, why was it done and > > why > > wasn't it documented? If not, can we have the original behaviour back > > please? :-) > > > > Regards, > > Steve Martin > > Allaire Certified Instructor > > > > (initially spotted by P.Murphy [ACI] ) > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Damon Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 13:51 > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Subject: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get > > your > > > feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > > > > > > While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and performance > issues > > > (across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many serious > > > feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be > > > significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > > > > > > Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > > > > > > 18965 Native Oracle CLOB support > > > 18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of Security > > Proxy > > > 17873
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Adam, I did. I also copied it to the list for the benefit of the other list participants, it just so happens that the list server stripped Damon's address details out of the To: field. > -Original Message- > From: Reynolds, Adam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 14:27 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > Sorry to be a bit of a bore, but read his email. You should email him > directly. > > > -- > > From: Steve Martin[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 27 September 2000 14:22 > > To: CF-Talk > > Cc: Phil > > Subject:RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > Damon, > > I haven't seen this raised as an issue elsewhere so I'll mention it to > > you. > > It isn't so much something that is broken than a change in behaviour > > between > > 4.01 and 4.5 which had the effect of breaking some of our code which > > relied > > on the 4.01 behaviour. Note also that this change in behaviour wasn't > > mentioned in the release notes for 4.5 > > The problem: > > > > You may be aware that when calling custom tags, either using the "CF_" > > syntax, or using "CFMODULE", you can pass a special attribute called > > "ATTRIBUTECOLLECTION", which is a struct of attributes. We use > it quite a > > lot when using optional parameters, as it allows a collection of > > parameters > > to be created, and then sent "en masse" to a module, e.g. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In practice, you can mix and match "attributecollection" and standard > > parameters, e.g. > > > > > > which is entirely equivalent to, say, > > > > > > The change has come in how repeated variables are treated, e.g. > > > > > > Here X is specified twice, once in the attributecollection, once as a > > normal > > parameter. > > > > The problem (for me at least, moving code from 4.01 to 4.5) is that in > > 4.01 > > the "normal" parameter has precedence, whereas in 4.5 the "struct" > > parameter > > has precedence, resulting in: > > > > 4.01 > > 4.5 > > > > Was there a reason for the initial change and if so, why was it done and > > why > > wasn't it documented? If not, can we have the original behaviour back > > please? :-) > > > > Regards, > > Steve Martin > > Allaire Certified Instructor > > > > (initially spotted by P.Murphy [ACI] ) > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Damon Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 13:51 > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Subject: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get > > your > > > feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > > > > > > While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and > performance issues > > > (across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many serious > > > feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be > > > significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > > > > > > Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > > > > > > 18965 Native Oracle CLOB support > > > 18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of Security > > Proxy > > > 17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support > > > 15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 > > characters > > > 18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post failure (but redirects must still be an > > > absolute url) > > > 18338, 17121 LSNumberFormat and NumberFormat problems > > > 16663 MIME attached over regular WAP gateway > > (UTF-8). > > > 19010 CFFILE/move problem on Unix file systems > > > 17601 COM Threading Model Changes > > > 18311 CFHTTP 'Connection Failure' error if the > > status code > > > is 204 > > > 18246 CFPOP
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
I know I know I know.sorry > -- > From: Steve Martin[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 27 September 2000 14:46 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > Adam, > I did. I also copied it to the list for the benefit of the other list > participants, it just so happens that the list server stripped Damon's > address details out of the To: field. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Reynolds, Adam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 14:27 > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > > > Sorry to be a bit of a bore, but read his email. You should email him > > directly. > > > > > -- > > > From: Steve Martin[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: 27 September 2000 14:22 > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Cc: Phil > > > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > > > Damon, > > > I haven't seen this raised as an issue elsewhere so I'll mention it to > > > you. > > > It isn't so much something that is broken than a change in behaviour > > > between > > > 4.01 and 4.5 which had the effect of breaking some of our code which > > > relied > > > on the 4.01 behaviour. Note also that this change in behaviour wasn't > > > mentioned in the release notes for 4.5 > > > The problem: > > > > > > You may be aware that when calling custom tags, either using the "CF_" > > > syntax, or using "CFMODULE", you can pass a special attribute called > > > "ATTRIBUTECOLLECTION", which is a struct of attributes. We use > > it quite a > > > lot when using optional parameters, as it allows a collection of > > > parameters > > > to be created, and then sent "en masse" to a module, e.g. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In practice, you can mix and match "attributecollection" and standard > > > parameters, e.g. > > > > > > > > > which is entirely equivalent to, say, > > > > > > > > > The change has come in how repeated variables are treated, e.g. > > > > > > > > > Here X is specified twice, once in the attributecollection, once as a > > > normal > > > parameter. > > > > > > The problem (for me at least, moving code from 4.01 to 4.5) is that in > > > 4.01 > > > the "normal" parameter has precedence, whereas in 4.5 the "struct" > > > parameter > > > has precedence, resulting in: > > > > > > 4.01 > > > 4.5 > > > > > > Was there a reason for the initial change and if so, why was it done > and > > > why > > > wasn't it documented? If not, can we have the original behaviour back > > > please? :-) > > > > > > Regards, > > > Steve Martin > > > Allaire Certified Instructor > > > > > > (initially spotted by P.Murphy [ACI] ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: Damon Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 13:51 > > > > To: CF-Talk > > > > Subject: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get > > > your > > > > feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > > > > > > > > While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and > > performance issues > > > > (across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many > serious > > > > feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be > > > > significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > > > > > > > > Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > > > > > > > > 18965 Native Oracle CLOB support > > > > 18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of Security > > > Proxy > > > > 17873
Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Thread-safe Sybase drivers on Linux would be nice :-) At 08:50 AM 9/27/00 -0400, Damon Cooper wrote: >Folks, > >ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get your >feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > >While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and performance issues >(across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many serious >feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be >significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > >Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > >18965 Native Oracle CLOB support >18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of Security Proxy >17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support >15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 characters >18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post failure (but redirects must still be an >absolute url) >18338, 17121LSNumberFormat and NumberFormat problems >16663 MIME attached over regular WAP gateway (UTF-8). >19010 CFFILE/move problem on Unix file systems >17601 COM Threading Model Changes >18311 CFHTTP 'Connection Failure' error if the status code >is 204 >18246 CFPOP unknown exception condition >18811 POP3 enhancement >18058, 16875Applet interface in CFAdmin problems with parm >fields >18607 MSAccess bug hangs CF on Win2k/SP1 >18579 Secuirty Administration Bug - cfm file change >17543 Locale Date Support - Solaris >10115 European dates broken in Solaris CF 4.5+ >19003 CFFTP connection bug >12523 Unix, LSParseDateTime only functions for US english. >18991 CFHTTP on Linux crash with >4k content >18234, 17792MS SQLServer problems on Linux >18778 Scheduled tasks don't run with CFREGISTRY disabled > >I can't promise anything, but this release is for you, and I want to make >sure you're heard. Please either post to the list or send email directly to >me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and reference your Allaire Issue/Bug # if you have >one. > >Thanks > >Damon Cooper >ColdFusion Release Manager >Allaire >-- >Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ >To Unsubscribe visit >http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a >message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. --- Peter Theobald, Chief Technology Officer LiquidStreaming http://www.liquidstreaming.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone 1.212.545.1232 x204 Fax 1.212.679.8032 -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Cold Fusion Studio crashes a Win98 system every time due to resource problems. At 08:50 AM 9/27/00 -0400, Damon Cooper wrote: >Folks, > >ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get your >feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > >While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and performance issues >(across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many serious >feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be >significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > >Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > >18965 Native Oracle CLOB support >18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of Security Proxy >17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support >15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 characters >18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post failure (but redirects must still be an >absolute url) >18338, 17121LSNumberFormat and NumberFormat problems >16663 MIME attached over regular WAP gateway (UTF-8). >19010 CFFILE/move problem on Unix file systems >17601 COM Threading Model Changes >18311 CFHTTP 'Connection Failure' error if the status code >is 204 >18246 CFPOP unknown exception condition >18811 POP3 enhancement >18058, 16875Applet interface in CFAdmin problems with parm >fields >18607 MSAccess bug hangs CF on Win2k/SP1 >18579 Secuirty Administration Bug - cfm file change >17543 Locale Date Support - Solaris >10115 European dates broken in Solaris CF 4.5+ >19003 CFFTP connection bug >12523 Unix, LSParseDateTime only functions for US english. >18991 CFHTTP on Linux crash with >4k content >18234, 17792MS SQLServer problems on Linux >18778 Scheduled tasks don't run with CFREGISTRY disabled > >I can't promise anything, but this release is for you, and I want to make >sure you're heard. Please either post to the list or send email directly to >me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and reference your Allaire Issue/Bug # if you have >one. > >Thanks > >Damon Cooper >ColdFusion Release Manager >Allaire >-- >Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ >To Unsubscribe visit >http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a >message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. --- Peter Theobald, Chief Technology Officer LiquidStreaming http://www.liquidstreaming.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone 1.212.545.1232 x204 Fax 1.212.679.8032 -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Peter: We do not have control over the Sybase drivers on linux that you are speaking about. Those come directly from Sybase, and Sybase has publicly stated that the drivers a non-thread-safe due to the whacked threading model on Linux. I agree with them, the threading model has been whacked, however, with the 2.4 kernel, the threading model has been re-written to allow for a better threading structure and model. Time will have to tell on this one. -Jesse > -Original Message- > From: Peter Theobald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 1:46 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > Thread-safe Sybase drivers on Linux would be nice :-) > > At 08:50 AM 9/27/00 -0400, Damon Cooper wrote: > >Folks, > > > >ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd > like to get your > >feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > > > >While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and > performance issues > >(across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as > many serious > >feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be > >significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > > > >Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > > > >18965 Native Oracle CLOB support > >18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of > Security Proxy > >17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support > >15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 characters > >18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post failure (but redirects > must still be an > >absolute url) > >18338, 17121LSNumberFormat and NumberFormat problems > >16663 MIME attached over regular WAP > gateway (UTF-8). > >19010 CFFILE/move problem on Unix file systems > >17601 COM Threading Model Changes > >18311 CFHTTP 'Connection Failure' error if > the status code > >is 204 > >18246 CFPOP unknown exception condition > >18811 POP3 enhancement > >18058, 16875Applet interface in CFAdmin problems > with parm > >fields > >18607 MSAccess bug hangs CF on Win2k/SP1 > >18579 Secuirty Administration Bug - cfm file change > >17543 Locale Date Support - Solaris > >10115 European dates broken in Solaris CF 4.5+ > >19003 CFFTP connection bug > >12523 Unix, LSParseDateTime only functions > for US english. > >18991 CFHTTP on Linux crash with >4k content > >18234, 17792MS SQLServer problems on Linux > >18778 Scheduled tasks don't run with > CFREGISTRY disabled > > > >I can't promise anything, but this release is for you, and I > want to make > >sure you're heard. Please either post to the list or send > email directly to > >me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and reference your Allaire > Issue/Bug # if you have > >one. > > > >Thanks > > > >Damon Cooper > >ColdFusion Release Manager > >Allaire > >- > - > >Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ > >To Unsubscribe visit > http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=list s/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. --- Peter Theobald, Chief Technology Officer LiquidStreaming http://www.liquidstreaming.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone 1.212.545.1232 x204 Fax 1.212.679.8032 -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Peter, the Sybase Open Client for Linux threading issue has nothing to do with Allaire or ColdFusion. The issue is that Open Client for Linux is currently single threaded. >From Sybase: "The current releases of OpenClient for Linux are NOT thread-safe. I'm told this is because of the thread-safe issues within Linux the libio <-> libpthread combination. Much development work is going on within this arena. We have decided with not releasing the threadsafe libraries until the known LinuxThreads issues are resolved." "...the Linux OpenClient 11.1.1 version is not thread safe. It is scheduled for 12.5 the last time I looked." Here are some references: http://webforums.sybase.com/nntp/nd58.nsf/docid/7f2c456f0362933d67523d4c c92f8a4d http://webforums.sybase.com/nntp/nd58.nsf/docid/735711d681681b03ad4743cc 3da7c977 http://webforums.sybase.com/nntp/nd33.nsf/docid/c403d2b1120d10c5bcbc605e f832ba6f - Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 01:45:39 -0400 From: Peter Theobald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Damon Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Thread-safe Sybase drivers on Linux would be nice :-) -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Peter, someone should be contacting you shortly for details. Thanks Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 01:50:36 -0400 From: Peter Theobald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Damon Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cold Fusion Studio crashes a Win98 system every time due to resource problems. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Sigh... I'm waiting for 2.4's raw devices too. Thanks. At 11:03 AM 9/28/00 -0400, Jesse Noller wrote: >Peter: > >We do not have control over the Sybase drivers on linux that you are >speaking about. Those come directly from Sybase, and Sybase has publicly >stated that the drivers a non-thread-safe due to the whacked threading model >on Linux. > >I agree with them, the threading model has been whacked, however, >with the 2.4 kernel, the threading model has been re-written to allow for a >better threading structure and model. > > >Time will have to tell on this one. > > > >-Jesse > >> -Original Message- >> From: Peter Theobald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 1:46 AM >> To: CF-Talk >> Subject: Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input >> >> >> Thread-safe Sybase drivers on Linux would be nice :-) >> >> At 08:50 AM 9/27/00 -0400, Damon Cooper wrote: >> >Folks, >> > >> >ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd >> like to get your >> >feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. >> > >> >While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and >> performance issues >> >(across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as >> many serious >> >feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be >> >significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). >> > >> >Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: >> > >> >18965 Native Oracle CLOB support >> >18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of >> Security Proxy >> >17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support >> >15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 characters >> >18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post failure (but redirects >> must still be an >> >absolute url) >> >18338, 17121LSNumberFormat and NumberFormat problems >> >16663 MIME attached over regular WAP >> gateway (UTF-8). >> >19010 CFFILE/move problem on Unix file systems >> >17601 COM Threading Model Changes >> >18311 CFHTTP 'Connection Failure' error if >> the status code >> >is 204 >> >18246 CFPOP unknown exception condition >> >18811 POP3 enhancement >> >18058, 16875Applet interface in CFAdmin problems >> with parm >> >fields >> >18607 MSAccess bug hangs CF on Win2k/SP1 >> >18579 Secuirty Administration Bug - cfm file change >> >17543 Locale Date Support - Solaris >> >10115 European dates broken in Solaris CF 4.5+ >> >19003 CFFTP connection bug >> >12523 Unix, LSParseDateTime only functions >> for US english. >> >18991 CFHTTP on Linux crash with >4k content >> >18234, 17792MS SQLServer problems on Linux >> >18778 Scheduled tasks don't run with >> CFREGISTRY disabled >> > >> >I can't promise anything, but this release is for you, and I >> want to make >> >sure you're heard. Please either post to the list or send >> email directly to >> >me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and reference your Allaire >> Issue/Bug # if you have >> >one. >> > >> >Thanks >> > >> >Damon Cooper >> >ColdFusion Release Manager >> >Allaire >> >- >> - >> >Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ >> >To Unsubscribe visit >> http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=list >s/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with >'unsubscribe' in the body. > > >--- >Peter Theobald, Chief Technology Officer >LiquidStreaming http://www.liquidstreaming.com >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Phone 1.212.545.1232 x204 Fax 1.212.679.8032 > > >-- >Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ >To Unsubscribe visit >http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or >
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Man, i just want the new threading model, the SMP performance increases and the new TCP stack. Sign up to Linux kernel devl for the latest word - http://www.tux.org/lkml/ (caution, HIGH traffic list) -Jesse BTW: further talks on this thread should be moved to cf-linux. > -Original Message- > From: Peter Theobald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 12:22 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > Sigh... > > I'm waiting for 2.4's raw devices too. > > Thanks. > -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Re: CFHTTP building a query: the CSV parsing is broken as follows: If you specify a text qualifier then EVERY field must be surrounded by that text qualifier or CFHTTP gives an error. I would expect that a very common source of CSV files is from Microsoft Excel. When Excel saves CSV files it ONLY puts " text qualifiers " around fields that have commas embedded in them. All fields without commas do NOT get "text qualifiers" (because there is no ambiguity with the delimiters). This as I just pointed out will cause CFHTTP to give an error. At 08:50 AM 9/27/00 -0400, Damon Cooper wrote: >Folks, > >ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get your >feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. > >While Service Pack 1 focused heavily on stability and performance issues >(across platform and Unix-specific), we'd like to nail as many serious >feature and tag bugs as possible, although the release cycle will be >significantly shorter (shooting for an early November release). > >Currently, here's a summary of bug fixes slated for SP2: > >18965 Native Oracle CLOB support >18389 Security/Solaris Cfexec restart of Security Proxy >17873 Informix 2.3 & 2.5 client lib support >15776 CFMAIL recipients truncated at 246 characters >18191,18237,18314 CFHTTP Post failure (but redirects must still be an >absolute url) >18338, 17121LSNumberFormat and NumberFormat problems >16663 MIME attached over regular WAP gateway (UTF-8). >19010 CFFILE/move problem on Unix file systems >17601 COM Threading Model Changes >18311 CFHTTP 'Connection Failure' error if the status code >is 204 >18246 CFPOP unknown exception condition >18811 POP3 enhancement >18058, 16875Applet interface in CFAdmin problems with parm >fields >18607 MSAccess bug hangs CF on Win2k/SP1 >18579 Secuirty Administration Bug - cfm file change >17543 Locale Date Support - Solaris >10115 European dates broken in Solaris CF 4.5+ >19003 CFFTP connection bug >12523 Unix, LSParseDateTime only functions for US english. >18991 CFHTTP on Linux crash with >4k content >18234, 17792MS SQLServer problems on Linux >18778 Scheduled tasks don't run with CFREGISTRY disabled > >I can't promise anything, but this release is for you, and I want to make >sure you're heard. Please either post to the list or send email directly to >me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and reference your Allaire Issue/Bug # if you have >one. > >Thanks > >Damon Cooper >ColdFusion Release Manager >Allaire >-- >Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ >To Unsubscribe visit >http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a >message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. --- Peter Theobald, Chief Technology Officer LiquidStreaming http://www.liquidstreaming.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone 1.212.545.1232 x204 Fax 1.212.679.8032 -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
At 08:50 AM 9/27/00 , you wrote: >ColdFusion Service Pack 2 is under construction, and I'd like to get your >feedback on what you believe to be Must-Be-Fixed items. i know one of the items that makes me very uncomfortable is the apparent code incompatibility on the locking issues. i.e. code written for CF server 4.5.1 locking doesn't easily work on 4.0 and vice versa.. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
To some this may seem trivial but, the PDF documentation HAS to get fixed. For many this is the only documentation that they have for 4.5.x and quite frankly, it sucks. It's not the content, it's the usability. In earlier versions, especially the 4.0.x series, the included and downloadable PDF documentation was thorough and well built. There were bookmarks, thumbnails, and the links all worked. Starting with CFAS 4.5 the PDF's have none of these, which makes them almost useless. "Hmmm, was CFREGISTRY on page 171 or 117? What page number is the end of tags and the beginning of functions? Why don't these darn bookmarks work!?" You get the picture. Not everyone uses Studio and many CF servers have the HTML documentation removed. If PDF was only supposed to be a supplement my opinion would be different but, for upgraders, purchasers of electronic distributions, or those who do not use Studio the PDF docs are all that they have. Unfortunately, Allaire's documentation has always had problems, whether it be incompleteness, inaccuracy, lateness, or terrible physical quality. The documentation group, Margaret et al., made great strides in the 4.0.x series but, things seem to be crumbling again. Regards, * Steve Bernard -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
To some this may seem trivial but, the PDF documentation HAS to get fixed. For many this is the only documentation that they have for 4.5.x and quite frankly, it sucks. It's not the content, it's the usability. In earlier versions, especially the 4.0.x series, the included and downloadable PDF documentation was thorough and well built. There were bookmarks, thumbnails, and the links all worked. Starting with CFAS 4.5 the PDF's have none of these, which makes them almost useless. "Hmmm, was CFREGISTRY on page 171 or 117? What page number is the end of tags and the beginning of functions? Why don't these darn bookmarks work!?" You get the picture. Not everyone uses Studio and many CF servers have the HTML documentation removed. If PDF was only supposed to be a supplement my opinion would be different but, for upgraders, purchasers of electronic distributions, or those who do not use Studio the PDF docs are all that they have. Unfortunately, Allaire's documentation has always had problems, whether it be incompleteness, inaccuracy, lateness, or terrible physical quality. The documentation group, Margaret et al., made great strides in the 4.0.x series but, things seem to be crumbling again. Regards, * Steve Bernard -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
I gave up on this dream months ago. I now exclusively use the online documentation. Someone else has made a new version of this just don't expect allaire to do anything about it. I mentioned it to Ben Freuh when he was in town and I have heard nor seen anything come of it, why should allaire have to appease thier customers anyways. Bob Everland -Original Message- From: Steve Bernard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 11:53 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input To some this may seem trivial but, the PDF documentation HAS to get fixed. For many this is the only documentation that they have for 4.5.x and quite frankly, it sucks. It's not the content, it's the usability. In earlier versions, especially the 4.0.x series, the included and downloadable PDF documentation was thorough and well built. There were bookmarks, thumbnails, and the links all worked. Starting with CFAS 4.5 the PDF's have none of these, which makes them almost useless. "Hmmm, was CFREGISTRY on page 171 or 117? What page number is the end of tags and the beginning of functions? Why don't these darn bookmarks work!?" You get the picture. Not everyone uses Studio and many CF servers have the HTML documentation removed. If PDF was only supposed to be a supplement my opinion would be different but, for upgraders, purchasers of electronic distributions, or those who do not use Studio the PDF docs are all that they have. Unfortunately, Allaire's documentation has always had problems, whether it be incompleteness, inaccuracy, lateness, or terrible physical quality. The documentation group, Margaret et al., made great strides in the 4.0.x series but, things seem to be crumbling again. Regards, * Steve Bernard -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
I'll second that! Since we're on the documentation here are some gripes of my own: Why don't the hard copy docs have the TAG NAMES or FUNCTION NAMES printed at the header or footers or at the top of each page? It's terribly inconvenient to find anything. If you flip through the book 75% of the time you have no idea where you are without reading the text. Just the simple addition of names at the top of each page would make finding things so much faster. Why are there so many useless descriptions of tags and functions with such illuminating explanations as: Value=value. The reference manual is NOT a reference manual. A reference manual is supposed to be a comprehensive definition of the language. This leaves SO MUCH unsaid that I have to search between all three Allaire books, two Ben Forta books, the Danesh book, and the online Knowledge Base to find answers to simple questions. To pick one at random: REFind. No list of what RegEx expressions are valid. So I turn to my Perl docs. There it is in complete detail... but sorry they are not compatible... So where *DO* I finally find the list? In a knowledge base article about HomeSite. One of the reasons I am so productive programming in the Unix environment is that everything is so well documented. I wish that were nearly true of Cold Fusion. At 11:52 AM 9/29/00 -0400, Steve Bernard wrote: >To some this may seem trivial but, the PDF documentation HAS to get fixed. >For many this is the only documentation that they have for 4.5.x and quite >frankly, it sucks. It's not the content, it's the usability. In earlier >versions, especially the 4.0.x series, the included and downloadable PDF >documentation was thorough and well built. There were bookmarks, thumbnails, >and the links all worked. Starting with CFAS 4.5 the PDF's have none of >these, which makes them almost useless. "Hmmm, was CFREGISTRY on page 171 or >117? What page number is the end of tags and the beginning of functions? Why >don't these darn bookmarks work!?" You get the picture. Not everyone uses >Studio and many CF servers have the HTML documentation removed. If PDF was >only supposed to be a supplement my opinion would be different but, for >upgraders, purchasers of electronic distributions, or those who do not use >Studio the PDF docs are all that they have. Unfortunately, Allaire's >documentation has always had problems, whether it be incompleteness, >inaccuracy, lateness, or terrible physical quality. The documentation group, >Margaret et al., made great strides in the 4.0.x series but, things seem to >be crumbling again. > >Regards, > >* > >Steve Bernard > > >-- >Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ >To Unsubscribe visit >http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a >message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. --- Peter Theobald, Chief Technology Officer LiquidStreaming http://www.liquidstreaming.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone 1.212.545.1232 x204 Fax 1.212.679.8032 -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
-Original Message- From: Robert Everland III [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 12:36 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input I gave up on this dream months ago. I now exclusively use the online documentation. Someone else has made a new version of this just don't expect allaire to do anything about it. I mentioned it to Ben Freuh when he was in town and I have heard nor seen anything come of it, why should allaire have to appease thier customers anyways. Bob Everland -Original Message- From: Steve Bernard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 11:53 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input To some this may seem trivial but, the PDF documentation HAS to get fixed. For many this is the only documentation that they have for 4.5.x and quite frankly, it sucks. It's not the content, it's the usability. In earlier versions, especially the 4.0.x series, the included and downloadable PDF documentation was thorough and well built. There were bookmarks, thumbnails, and the links all worked. Starting with CFAS 4.5 the PDF's have none of these, which makes them almost useless. "Hmmm, was CFREGISTRY on page 171 or 117? What page number is the end of tags and the beginning of functions? Why don't these darn bookmarks work!?" You get the picture. Not everyone uses Studio and many CF servers have the HTML documentation removed. If PDF was only supposed to be a supplement my opinion would be different but, for upgraders, purchasers of electronic distributions, or those who do not use Studio the PDF docs are all that they have. Unfortunately, Allaire's documentation has always had problems, whether it be incompleteness, inaccuracy, lateness, or terrible physical quality. The documentation group, Margaret et al., made great strides in the 4.0.x series but, things seem to be crumbling again. Regards, * Steve Bernard -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
It just astounds me that a company would develop a development platform and then provide documentation that is so obviously hacked together at the last minute. This casts shadows of unmanaged development, a lack of concern for the customer, and short-sightedness from the management of the company. For a long time they have been happy to have Ben Forta, et al. do their evangelism, documentation, and customer support via the Forums and listservs like this. Sadly, with all the work done by outsiders to hold the product up to the light, Allaire's internal development seems to be in disarray. Too much, too fast could be the hump that broke the camels back. Steve -Original Message- From: Robert Everland III [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 12:36 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input I gave up on this dream months ago. I now exclusively use the online documentation. Someone else has made a new version of this just don't expect allaire to do anything about it. I mentioned it to Ben Freuh when he was in town and I have heard nor seen anything come of it, why should allaire have to appease thier customers anyways. Bob Everland -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
It just astounds me that a company would develop a development platform and then provide documentation that is so obviously hacked together at the last minute. This casts shadows of unmanaged development, a lack of concern for the customer, and short-sightedness from the management of the company. For a long time they have been happy to have Ben Forta, et al. do their evangelism, documentation, and customer support via the Forums and listservs like this. Sadly, with all the work done by outsiders to hold the product up to the light, Allaire's internal development seems to be in disarray. Too much, too fast could be the hump that broke the camels back. Steve -Original Message- From: Robert Everland III [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 12:36 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input I gave up on this dream months ago. I now exclusively use the online documentation. Someone else has made a new version of this just don't expect allaire to do anything about it. I mentioned it to Ben Freuh when he was in town and I have heard nor seen anything come of it, why should allaire have to appease thier customers anyways. Bob Everland -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
---Reply to mail from Steve Martin about TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > You may be aware that when calling custom tags, either using the "CF_" > syntax, or using "CFMODULE", you can pass a special attribute called > "ATTRIBUTECOLLECTION", which is a struct of attributes. We use it quite a > lot when using optional parameters, as it allows a collection of parameters > to be created, and then sent "en masse" to a module, e.g. > > The change has come in how repeated variables are treated, e.g. > > > Here X is specified twice, once in the attributecollection, once as a normal > parameter. > > The problem (for me at least, moving code from 4.01 to 4.5) is that in 4.01 > the "normal" parameter has precedence, whereas in 4.5 the "struct" parameter > has precedence, resulting in: > > 4.01 > 4.5 > > Was there a reason for the initial change and if so, why was it done and why > wasn't it documented? If not, can we have the original behaviour back > please? :-) Are you sure of this ? I use repeating variables like this all the time (CF 4.5) to over-ride same named variables in an ATTRIBUTECOLLECTION structure (generally fuseaction) ?? --- James Sleeman -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
> i know one of the items that makes me very uncomfortable is > the apparent code incompatibility on the locking issues. i.e. > code written for CF server 4.5.1 locking doesn't easily work > on 4.0 and vice versa.. This isn't really the case. Code using CFLOCK under CF 4.0.1 will work on a 4.5.1 server. Code using the SCOPE attribute of CFLOCK under 4.5.1 won't work in 4.0.1, since 4.0.1 doesn't have a SCOPE attribute, but that kind of thing happens anytime you use the latest features of the language. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Here's one: I'd like positional parameters to modules. It would make calling a module so much more concise. And I'd like that to extend to CF's built in tags too. For example: instead of instead of It could be easily implemented by passing an "attributes" array with the values in the order they were passed. It would be helpful to have a helper tag to use in the module to bind them to variables like so: -or- This would be used to match up arguments by position. Of course they could still be specified the old way by name as well. And while we're at it, I often have dozens of one variable outputs that are made too wordy by the syntax: #var#. I'd like to see an alternate syntax: or even better using position parameters: Of course this could be written as a custom tag: #evaluate(attributes.value)# But the point it to have dozens of these in a page, and that would slow it down too much. --- Peter Theobald, Chief Technology Officer LiquidStreaming http://www.liquidstreaming.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone 1.212.545.1232 x204 Fax 1.212.545.0938 -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > -Original Message- > From: Peter Theobald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 1:36 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input > > > Here's one: > > I'd like positional parameters to modules. It would make > calling a module so much more concise. And I'd like that to > extend to CF's built in tags too. For example: > > instead of template="mytag.cfm"> > And while we're at it, I often have dozens of one variable > outputs that are made too wordy by the syntax: > #var#. I'd like to see an alternate That sounds like a nifty idea, but I suspect it would be rather unpleasant to implement and somewhat confusing to call (just what order SHOULD the params be passed in?). Perhaps an alternate method to get essentially the same functionality would be to expose ALL of the functionality currently handled by tags as functions. That would make blocks far more powerful as well. And while we're talking about ... How about just aliasing and to respectively. Sure it looks like PHP, but it's easier to deal with... Not that I would expect any of *that* to happen in a service pack release. They're features I'd like to have (especially the functionalized tags), but I'd rather the coders concentrate on squishing the bugs in SP2 rather than adding tons of new features... Regards, Zac Bedell -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBOdzMjQraVoMWBwRBEQIb6ACeONxuqAiVCFqDbNJUUfEvmERhZCYAoMp9 S/hg0dvcG8aQpn59dDd9YwYC =NAga -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input
Ah! CFHTTP queries! A big item for my personal the wish list: CFHTTP has the useful ability to take data from a URL and turn it into a query that you can then manipulate as any query. 1) CFHTTP interprets the data as a comma separated list (CSV) to turn it into a query. *BUT* it does NOT correctly interpret Microsoft Excel's "format" of CSV files, which in my experience is the source of 100% of the CSV files I use. This makes CFHTTP useless for reading Excel CSV files :-( . Specifically, Excel does NOT put quotes around fields without commas, Excel DOES put quotes around fields with embedded commas (to protect them from being interpreted as field separators). CFHTTP will choke on this format. Either ALL of the fields must have quotes or NONE of them (CF V4.5.1) 2) I often need to allow users to upload a file and interpret it as a query. Ie: my users keep administrative data in spreadsheets and upload it to make bulk changes to the database. I *rarely* need to make a query out of a URL on another site. However this query functionality is built into CFHTTP only. So I have to upload the file to a web-accessible place (being careful with naming so multiple users don't clobber each other) and then in a second step retrieve it from my own web site with CFHTTP. These two steps shouldn't be needed. I'd like CFFILE or some other function to be able to make a query directly out of a file! --- Peter Theobald, Chief Technology Officer LiquidStreaming http://www.liquidstreaming.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone 1.212.545.1232 x204 Fax 1.212.545.0938 -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input - locking
It is probably too big a change for just a service pack - but maybe keep it in mind for the next point release: I would like to request an option to automatically lock variables. I read the "best practices" paper on the allaire site that explains why you don't have it - but you have to understand our point of view. I (and I am sure everyone else on this list) have thousands of templates that I started writing with Cold Fusion 2.0, that work perfectly. There isn't time to look at every template that I ever wrote, and add the locking code for it, so it is just sitting on the server, probably causing the server to become unstable. I would gladly give up a little performance to have automatic locking, to gain stability. I would set it up so that you can turn it on | off in the cfapplication tag on a project by project basis, so for apps where it is important for consistency issues or perfomance issues, I can do it manually, or if the app is on a shared server - we can be sure to have the right setting, not having to rely on the isp to decide which setting is best. I would have it default to automatic locking unless explicited selected not to have it. thanks Al Musella, DPM Musella Foundation >i know one of the items that makes me very uncomfortable is the apparent >code incompatibility on the locking issues. i.e. code written for CF server >4.5.1 locking doesn't easily work on 4.0 and vice versa.. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input - locking
Amen. Automatic locking should be the default. After all, this is how a good RDBMS works (and a good application server for that matter). If the developer wants to override the default locking mechanism to ensure transactional integrity, then that tool should be available to the them. But don't shuffle the entire burden of locking off onto the developer because you're asking a single threaded application server to behave as a multi-threaded one. That's inexcusable. Benjamin S. Rogers Web Developer, c4.net voice: (508) 240-0051 fax: (508) 240-0057 -Original Message- From: Al Musella, DPM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 3:34 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: TO ALL: Request for ColdFusion SP2 Input - locking It is probably too big a change for just a service pack - but maybe keep it in mind for the next point release: I would like to request an option to automatically lock variables. I read the "best practices" paper on the allaire site that explains why you don't have it - but you have to understand our point of view. I (and I am sure everyone else on this list) have thousands of templates that I started writing with Cold Fusion 2.0, that work perfectly. There isn't time to look at every template that I ever wrote, and add the locking code for it, so it is just sitting on the server, probably causing the server to become unstable. I would gladly give up a little performance to have automatic locking, to gain stability. I would set it up so that you can turn it on | off in the cfapplication tag on a project by project basis, so for apps where it is important for consistency issues or perfomance issues, I can do it manually, or if the app is on a shared server - we can be sure to have the right setting, not having to rely on the isp to decide which setting is best. I would have it default to automatic locking unless explicited selected not to have it. thanks Al Musella, DPM Musella Foundation >i know one of the items that makes me very uncomfortable is the apparent >code incompatibility on the locking issues. i.e. code written for CF server >4.5.1 locking doesn't easily work on 4.0 and vice versa.. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
