Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
Side note: neither Model-Glue, Mach-II, nor Fusebox 5 will run on CF 4.5 or 5.0. On 7/2/06, Claude Schneegans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm interested to hear what you would consider a feature of FB, M2 or MG that a project won't need. Just an example: support for CF 4.5 or 5 if your server is under CFMX and there is no chance you go back to a lower version. ~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/message.cfm/forumid:4/messageid:245907 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
On Monday 03 July 2006 17:59, Robert Everland III wrote: There could have been, and you would never have known :-) Actually, because the code is open I was able to browse through the source and see for myself. Which is good, but neither here nor there in the whole 'framework or not' debate. -- Tom Chiverton This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com. ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245353 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
On Sunday 02 July 2006 16:09, Claude Schneegans wrote: Just an example: support for CF 4.5 or 5 if your server is under CFMX and there is no chance you go back to a lower version. So what ? That's not a negative point of the framework is it ? As long as it runs on what you've got, and better still stuff you're likely to get going forward, what does it matter ? -- Tom Chiverton This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com. We are pleased to announce that Halliwells LLP has been voted AIM Lawyer of the Year at the 2005 Growth Company Awards ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245275 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
So what ? That's not a negative point of the framework is it ? Sure it is: this, and some other features you don't need, make the code more difficult to read. -- ___ REUSE CODE! Use custom tags; See http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm (Please send any spam to this address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Thanks. ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245289 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
On Monday 03 July 2006 14:26, Claude Schneegans wrote: So what ? That's not a negative point of the framework is it ? Sure it is: this, and some other features you don't need, make the code more difficult to read. The whole point of a (good) framework is you don't need to read the framework code, and it should hide details like doing different things on different servers from you, as an application coder. So isn't 'more difficult to read' a moot point ? -- Tom Chiverton This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com. ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245291 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
Claude, You've tried to make your point with frameworks, but you haven't made any factual statements. It's fine if you don't want to use frameworks, but if you want anyone else to not use them then I think you need to document any issues with them as opposed to things like Includes CF 4.5 and CF 5 backwards compatibility when the latest versions don't. There was a time when fusebox did this, but it was seperate files, so if you didn't use CF 5, then you would not even have to use that file. My point is this, open frameworks are a good idea because it allows more than just you access to the code and an open discussion on issues. We all understand that frameworks forces a developer to learn something new, in most of these cases it forces the developer to learn OOP or MVC. But that doesn't mean learning those methodologies is a bad thing. It only helps your marketability and allows for you to move to other languages if a business decision forces your hand before you're ready. Bob ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245294 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
Tom, All of the new frameworks use CFC, so they won't even work on CF 4.5 or CF 5. One of the frameworks I know , fusebox 3, used a cfswitch in the main file and included a specific framework depending on which server you were on. You didn't need this logic, you could just include the correct file on which server you were on. There was no logic in the framework file that had different syntax based on what CF version you were on , which would make the code harder to work with. I have worked on code that I needed to work on multiple versions of CF and with how the tags change and how error trapping works in CF it is almost impossible to have one file that works on many different versions of CF. Bob ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245297 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
On Monday 03 July 2006 15:15, Robert Everland III wrote: All of the new frameworks use CFC, so they won't even work on CF 4.5 or CF 5. One of the frameworks I know , fusebox 3, used a cfswitch in the main file and included a specific framework depending on which server you were on. You didn't need this logic, you could just include the correct file on which server you were on. FB3 predates CFCs. An obvious optimisation to FB3 is to remove the switch and just hard code the platform include, yes. OTOH, it would run *fine* in allmost all cases without you having to care. There was no logic in the framework file that had different syntax based on what CF version you were on , There could have been, and you would never have known :-) trapping works in CF it is almost impossible to have one file that works on many different versions of CF. True, esp. if the versions are far apart in time. But that's like moaning your Java 1.5 application doesn't work in 1.4 when you use 1.5's features... -- Tom Chiverton This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com. ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245302 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
There was no logic in the framework file that had different syntax based on what CF version you were on , There could have been, and you would never have known :-) Actually, because the code is open I was able to browse through the source and see for myself. Bob ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245305 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
I'm interested to hear what you would consider a feature of FB, M2 or MG that a project won't need. Just an example: support for CF 4.5 or 5 if your server is under CFMX and there is no chance you go back to a lower version. ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245256 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
why set up a company with a home grown framework that you may or may not be there to teach your succesor how to use. There are plenty of good reasons: - any framework already developed and in the public domain may be far too general and may include many feature your own project won't need; - your own project may require some very specific needs that are not taken care by the framework, so you have to add it anyway. For me, the first point is a major point. You waist more time horsing around with things you don't need that the time you save using the framework. -- ___ REUSE CODE! Use custom tags; See http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm (Please send any spam to this address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Thanks. ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245207 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
On 7/1/06, Claude Schneegans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are plenty of good reasons: - any framework already developed and in the public domain may be far too general and may include many feature your own project won't need; Features your project won't need? Not likely, as public frameworks tend to be generalized enough to only include the base components. Still, I'm interested to hear what you would consider a feature of FB, M2 or MG that a project won't need. - your own project may require some very specific needs that are not taken care by the framework, so you have to add it anyway. This is why frameworks are open-source, and tend to be extensible. If you can't extend it through a normal way, you can always change the core behavior. However, again, I can't even think of a reason to do it for the big 3 frameworks. For me, the first point is a major point. You waist more time horsing around with things you don't need that the time you save using the framework. Yes, you are still figuring it out for the first project or two you make with a framework, but for the 3rd project, or the 10th, things get a lot easier, sites get started faster, and you begin to find what truly reusable code is like. When you can copy and paste a group of features into a site you just started to give yourself a huge jumpstart, you'll be thanking whoever made that framework. -nathan strutz http://www.dopefly.com/ ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245233 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
The answer, my fellow CF coders, to the question of whether or not using frameworks is a good thing, is an unequivocable YES. Right, but frameworks are like underwear: you'll fell more comfortable in your own. This is what I call my underware ;-) -- ___ REUSE CODE! Use custom tags; See http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm (Please send any spam to this address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Thanks. ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245114 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
100 developers working on a CF project? What the heck was the project? -Original Message- From: Robert Everland III [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 8:50 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Good blog post on the frameworks debate http://www.kcwebcore.org/blog/index.cfm/2006/6/29/CFUNITED--The-Framework-Debate-Continues From the blog: Near the end of this mock trial, Simon made a point that set me free of the conflict of the debate. He related an account of a project he had worked on in England some time in the past in which he had 100 developers under him. He shared how it was that this large team had tried using Mach II, tried using Fusebox, and in both instances found those frameworks wanting. Then he showed them his own 'methodology', which they readily adopted and used to successfully complete the project. Simon's point was that he and his team had accomplished a large task, and didn't need to use a framework in the process. But between Simon's words lay the whole truth of this matter, the truth that finally freed me from the points and counterpoints that were tugging my intellect in both directions. This truth, folks, is this: Any application that actually works uses a framework. Simon likes to call his framework his 'methodology', resisting the urge to give it any kind of formal name or documentat! ion, and thus disguising it in obscurity and vagueness. Nevertheless, it is indeed a framework. So folks, this whole debate is bogus, the opposition's stance is vapor, and in reality is a one sided debate with the answer to the question of the validity of frameworks already woven into the very fabric of both sides of the argument. The answer, my fellow CF coders, to the question of whether or not using frameworks is a good thing, is an unequivocable YES. You need frameworks, and whether you roll your own or adopt a community standard, there is no way to avoid them...logic will not permit it. Bob ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245115 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
On Friday 30 June 2006 15:19, James Holmes wrote: So all of us who are too busy writing good code to bother participating in the debate can continue writing good code and ignore the debate? Good; I'll get back to work. Heh :-) Using a framework, and making good use of hundreds of other peoples good work in building a useful framework are two different things :-) -- Tom Chiverton This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com. We are pleased to announce that Halliwells LLP has been voted AIM Lawyer of the Year at the 2005 Growth Company Awards ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245130 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Good blog post on the frameworks debate
But my point was - are they moving to .NET and only using BD.NET in the interim. I don't think any of use know for sure, not even Vince and crew. Only the folks at Myspace and Fox know the answer, and even if they told us, a management decision could negate what they say. Bob ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:245133 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
