Re: HomeSite+/CF Studio wizard for TinyMCE Version 2
I see some of you have downloaded the HomeSite+/CF Studio wizard for TinyMCE; I wondering if any of you have used it yet, and your thoughts? I just posted a HomeSite+/CF Studio wizard for TinyMCE Version 2, though I think it should work for 1.45 too. You can download the wizard on the following page: http://www.aftershockweb.net/forums/messages.cfm/ThreadId/65 Please let me know if you like this wizard, also please use the above forum for any support issues. Also, there is no button image at this time. If someone would like to make one I'll add it to the next version. Thank you, Aftershock Web Design, Inc. by: Stan Winchester President/Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.aftershockweb.com/ Phone 503-244-3440 Fax 503-244-3454 ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:228422 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
HomeSite+/CF Studio wizard for TinyMCE Version 2
I just posted a HomeSite+/CF Studio wizard for TinyMCE Version 2, though I think it should work for 1.45 too. You can download the wizard on the following page: http://www.aftershockweb.net/forums/messages.cfm/ThreadId/65 Please let me know if you like this wizard, also please use the above forum for any support issues. Also, there is no button image at this time. If someone would like to make one I'll add it to the next version. Thank you, Aftershock Web Design, Inc. by: Stan Winchester President/Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.aftershockweb.com/ Phone 503-244-3440 Fax 503-244-3454 ~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:228318 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
cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing
Hi all, just wanted to announce that cf_advancedemail version 2 has gone to beta and that I could use some help with testing. What is cf_advancedemail? cf_advancedemail is a custom tag that lets you send email in both plain text and HTML, and include images in the email message, so the images are also available when the reader is off-line. Does it work? From my server (CF 4.5.2 SP2 on NT) to Mozilla and Outlook it does. For the rest I don't know, and that is where I need help. How expensive is it? Free. BSD licence, so you are even allowed to use this tag in a project you sell to a customer without having to pay anything. (For version 1 you had to pay in the past, but no more.) How does it work? In its simplest form it works like this: cf_advancedemail from=me@domain to=you@domain cf_advancedemailparam URL=url tempdir=path /cf_advancedemail This would send an email in both plain text and HTML with all that is at the URL, and all images references at the URL. More advanced options include specifying a different plaintext and HTML text, cache control, advanced previewing etc. How can I help? Download the tag, install it and try it. I am especially looking for people who can test it on Solaris, HP-UX and Linux. The other thing is that if you have a really exotic email client you can send me an email (off-list) and I will send you a test message and you can tell me how it looks. Where to get it? http://jochem.vandieten.net/coldfusion/customtags/advancedemail/ Thanx, Jochem ~~ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing
looks good :) We will test it over this weekend likely... -paris -Original Message- From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 14:44 To: CF-Talk Subject: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing Hi all, just wanted to announce that cf_advancedemail version 2 has gone to beta and that I could use some help with testing. What is cf_advancedemail? cf_advancedemail is a custom tag that lets you send email in both plain text and HTML, and include images in the email message, so the images are also available when the reader is off-line. Does it work? From my server (CF 4.5.2 SP2 on NT) to Mozilla and Outlook it does. For the rest I don't know, and that is where I need help. How expensive is it? Free. BSD licence, so you are even allowed to use this tag in a project you sell to a customer without having to pay anything. (For version 1 you had to pay in the past, but no more.) How does it work? In its simplest form it works like this: cf_advancedemail from=me@domain to=you@domain cf_advancedemailparam URL=url tempdir=path /cf_advancedemail This would send an email in both plain text and HTML with all that is at the URL, and all images references at the URL. More advanced options include specifying a different plaintext and HTML text, cache control, advanced previewing etc. How can I help? Download the tag, install it and try it. I am especially looking for people who can test it on Solaris, HP-UX and Linux. The other thing is that if you have a really exotic email client you can send me an email (off-list) and I will send you a test message and you can tell me how it looks. Where to get it? http://jochem.vandieten.net/coldfusion/customtags/advancedemail/ Thanx, Jochem ~~ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing
something else kind of struck me when looking at your tag documentation... you are writing to the spool directory :) good... Now a lot of people have been on the list complaining about CF and its inability to manage large volume mailings... without disk issues, bugs, slowness, etc... I was wondering if you or anyone else had looked at the actual MAIL SPOOL on your mail server... Here is my next generation concept for your program and people developing mail stuff with regard to customized volume oriented programs... 1. Run the query.. 2. Construct the messages. 3. Rather than parsing to the spool directory: A. format the output to meet the standard mail specification. B. Parse the completed specification emailing to the mail servers outgoing directory... Anyone done anything like this? We run Mdaemon which is plain text files in directories just like CF... the specification would be simple to duplicate without documentation... Most of the other programs like SLMAIL and other 3rd party use text file format... not sure about Microsofts que... Anyone think such an approach might be worth investing time to attempt??? At any such point that this were to work, one would only be limited by the power of their email servers to send mail out... Maybe all that is obvious... Additionally, note, that this wouldn't work in situations where your email server is a shared resource of your hosting company/isp... I doubt they really support people parsing out volumes of email to their servers anyways :) -paris -Original Message- From: Paris Lundis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 14:49 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing looks good :) We will test it over this weekend likely... -paris -Original Message- From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 14:44 To: CF-Talk Subject: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing Hi all, just wanted to announce that cf_advancedemail version 2 has gone to beta and that I could use some help with testing. What is cf_advancedemail? cf_advancedemail is a custom tag that lets you send email in both plain text and HTML, and include images in the email message, so the images are also available when the reader is off-line. Does it work? From my server (CF 4.5.2 SP2 on NT) to Mozilla and Outlook it does. For the rest I don't know, and that is where I need help. How expensive is it? Free. BSD licence, so you are even allowed to use this tag in a project you sell to a customer without having to pay anything. (For version 1 you had to pay in the past, but no more.) How does it work? In its simplest form it works like this: cf_advancedemail from=me@domain to=you@domain cf_advancedemailparam URL=url tempdir=path /cf_advancedemail This would send an email in both plain text and HTML with all that is at the URL, and all images references at the URL. More advanced options include specifying a different plaintext and HTML text, cache control, advanced previewing etc. How can I help? Download the tag, install it and try it. I am especially looking for people who can test it on Solaris, HP-UX and Linux. The other thing is that if you have a really exotic email client you can send me an email (off-list) and I will send you a test message and you can tell me how it looks. Where to get it? http://jochem.vandieten.net/coldfusion/customtags/advancedemail/ Thanx, Jochem ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing
Jochem, I just took a quick look at your tag. Nice work. I see that you write directly to the CF spool directory and that you require the passing of the SMTP server name to the tag (or else you try to pull this info from the registry). Looks like this is used only to build the 'x-cf-...' headers. Are those headers necessary for CF to pick up the message from its spool? Also, is there no way to implement this just using CFMAIL, for systems where access to tags like CFFILE are restricted? Jim - Original Message - From: Jochem van Dieten [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 12:43 PM Subject: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing Hi all, just wanted to announce that cf_advancedemail version 2 has gone to beta and that I could use some help with testing. What is cf_advancedemail? cf_advancedemail is a custom tag that lets you send email in both plain text and HTML, and include images in the email message, so the images are also available when the reader is off-line. Does it work? From my server (CF 4.5.2 SP2 on NT) to Mozilla and Outlook it does. For the rest I don't know, and that is where I need help. How expensive is it? Free. BSD licence, so you are even allowed to use this tag in a project you sell to a customer without having to pay anything. (For version 1 you had to pay in the past, but no more.) How does it work? In its simplest form it works like this: cf_advancedemail from=me@domain to=you@domain cf_advancedemailparam URL=url tempdir=path /cf_advancedemail This would send an email in both plain text and HTML with all that is at the URL, and all images references at the URL. More advanced options include specifying a different plaintext and HTML text, cache control, advanced previewing etc. How can I help? Download the tag, install it and try it. I am especially looking for people who can test it on Solaris, HP-UX and Linux. The other thing is that if you have a really exotic email client you can send me an email (off-list) and I will send you a test message and you can tell me how it looks. Where to get it? http://jochem.vandieten.net/coldfusion/customtags/advancedemail/ Thanx, Jochem ~~ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing
Jochem, You know what would make this even more useful? If there was a DELAY value somewhere in there. So when sending huge volume mailings we could break them down into timed chunks like we were talking about last week. So say: VOLUME= 2 DELAY = -1 Would send out 20k messages and then wait until the spool was empty to send the next 20k, all the way until the end of the query. VOLUME= 2 DELAY = 600 That would send out 20k messages every 600 seconds. Delay of 0 would just be no delay at all. Sound like something you could build in? I've been trying to do a custom version of this for the past week and failing miserably. =P -- Bryant Tyson, WEB DEVELOPER http://webtys.com WebTY's, The Educated Choice. On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Paris Lundis wrote: something else kind of struck me when looking at your tag documentation... you are writing to the spool directory :) good... Now a lot of people have been on the list complaining about CF and its inability to manage large volume mailings... without disk issues, bugs, slowness, etc... I was wondering if you or anyone else had looked at the actual MAIL SPOOL on your mail server... Here is my next generation concept for your program and people developing mail stuff with regard to customized volume oriented programs... 1. Run the query.. 2. Construct the messages. 3. Rather than parsing to the spool directory: A. format the output to meet the standard mail specification. B. Parse the completed specification emailing to the mail servers outgoing directory... Anyone done anything like this? We run Mdaemon which is plain text files in directories just like CF... the specification would be simple to duplicate without documentation... Most of the other programs like SLMAIL and other 3rd party use text file format... not sure about Microsofts que... Anyone think such an approach might be worth investing time to attempt??? At any such point that this were to work, one would only be limited by the power of their email servers to send mail out... Maybe all that is obvious... Additionally, note, that this wouldn't work in situations where your email server is a shared resource of your hosting company/isp... I doubt they really support people parsing out volumes of email to their servers anyways :) -paris -Original Message- From: Paris Lundis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 14:49 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing looks good :) We will test it over this weekend likely... -paris -Original Message- From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2001 14:44 To: CF-Talk Subject: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing Hi all, just wanted to announce that cf_advancedemail version 2 has gone to beta and that I could use some help with testing. What is cf_advancedemail? cf_advancedemail is a custom tag that lets you send email in both plain text and HTML, and include images in the email message, so the images are also available when the reader is off-line. Does it work? From my server (CF 4.5.2 SP2 on NT) to Mozilla and Outlook it does. For the rest I don't know, and that is where I need help. How expensive is it? Free. BSD licence, so you are even allowed to use this tag in a project you sell to a customer without having to pay anything. (For version 1 you had to pay in the past, but no more.) How does it work? In its simplest form it works like this: cf_advancedemail from=me@domain to=you@domain cf_advancedemailparam URL=url tempdir=path /cf_advancedemail This would send an email in both plain text and HTML with all that is at the URL, and all images references at the URL. More advanced options include specifying a different plaintext and HTML text, cache control, advanced previewing etc. How can I help? Download the tag, install it and try it. I am especially looking for people who can test it on Solaris, HP-UX and Linux. The other thing is that if you have a really exotic email client you can send me an email (off-list) and I will send you a test message and you can tell me how it looks. Where to get it? http://jochem.vandieten.net/coldfusion/customtags/advancedemail/ Thanx, Jochem ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing
Paris Lundis wrote: something else kind of struck me when looking at your tag documentation... you are writing to the spool directory :) good... Yes. From there it is picked up by the default CF mail handler (dart.dll). I was wondering if you or anyone else had looked at the actual MAIL SPOOL on your mail server... Here is my next generation concept for your program and people developing mail stuff with regard to customized volume oriented programs... 1. Run the query.. 2. Construct the messages. 3. Rather than parsing to the spool directory: A. format the output to meet the standard mail specification. B. Parse the completed specification emailing to the mail servers outgoing directory... Anyone done anything like this? AFAIK happens all the time. For me to implement that I would need to know what additional requirements are needed when writing to a diferent mail handler. CF requires 7 specially formatted lines followed by a blank line. What would MDaemon/IIS SMTP/Sendmail(?) etc. require? We run Mdaemon which is plain text files in directories just like CF... the specification would be simple to duplicate without documentation... Most of the other programs like SLMAIL and other 3rd party use text file format... not sure about Microsofts que... Anyone think such an approach might be worth investing time to attempt??? I will include something a little bit more generic in the final version, i.e. the ability to return a variable which is the entire email content. Then people can figure out for themselves how to feed that to some SMTP system. Maybe all that is obvious... Additionally, note, that this wouldn't work in situations where your email server is a shared resource of your hosting company/isp... I doubt they really support people parsing out volumes of email to their servers anyways :) We do. Jochem ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing
Jim McAtee wrote: Jochem, I just took a quick look at your tag. Nice work. I see that you write directly to the CF spool directory and that you require the passing of the SMTP server name to the tag (or else you try to pull this info from the registry). Looks like this is used only to build the 'x-cf-...' headers. Are those headers necessary for CF to pick up the message from its spool? Yes. Also, is there no way to implement this just using CFMAIL, for systems where access to tags like CFFILE are restricted? What use would my tag be without cffile anyway? The point is that you can send attachments that appear inline. But I believe some people have got it to work using cfmail, at the expense of some email clients not understanding it. The problem is that CF adds some MIME-type regardless of what else is set. So you end up with 2 MIME headers, one correct one from cf_advancedemail and an incorrect one from cfmail. Jochem ~~ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing
Bryant Tyson wrote: Jochem, You know what would make this even more useful? If there was a DELAY value somewhere in there. So when sending huge volume mailings we could break them down into timed chunks like we were talking about last week. So say: VOLUME= 2 DELAY = -1 Would send out 20k messages and then wait until the spool was empty to send the next 20k, all the way until the end of the query. VOLUME= 2 DELAY = 600 That would send out 20k messages every 600 seconds. Delay of 0 would just be no delay at all. Sound like something you could build in? I've been trying to do a custom version of this for the past week and failing miserably. =P No. Since the tag doesn't handle any query loops or something (you have to place it in a cfloop manually) the tag is utterly unaware of being called in a loop. Also, unless you use some sort of cf_wait tag which still eats up a thread anyway it would seriously mess up all build in caching mechanisms because they are based on the request scope. But because the tag uses a different file format handling a large amount of email should be possible (I just need to make that part failsafe, it is currently possible that something goes quite wrong there, not sending out any email at all, but I already have the code for that in one of my other customtags). Jochem ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing
It sounds very interesting. Does the tag have any mechanism in place to avoid conflicts with the cfmail tag, such as if they were to both execute at the same time and attempt to write to the spool folder? I may have to look into it writing to my own mail server spool directory rather than the ColdFusion mail spool directory to avoid the 65,535 email limit of CF. Have you tried anything like this? tom Jochem van Dieten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Jim McAtee wrote: Jochem, I just took a quick look at your tag. Nice work. I see that you write directly to the CF spool directory and that you require the passing of the SMTP server name to the tag (or else you try to pull this info from the registry). Looks like this is used only to build the 'x-cf-...' headers. Are those headers necessary for CF to pick up the message from its spool? Yes. Also, is there no way to implement this just using CFMAIL, for systems where access to tags like CFFILE are restricted? What use would my tag be without cffile anyway? The point is that you can send attachments that appear inline. But I believe some people have got it to work using cfmail, at the expense of some email clients not understanding it. The problem is that CF adds some MIME-type regardless of what else is set. So you end up with 2 MIME headers, one correct one from cf_advancedemail and an incorrect one from cfmail. Jochem ~~ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: cf_advancedemail version 2 beta testing
tom muck wrote: It sounds very interesting. Does the tag have any mechanism in place to avoid conflicts with the cfmail tag, such as if they were to both execute at the same time and attempt to write to the spool folder? Documentation copy-paste: Note to ISP's To my knowledge this tag entails no security issues other than those related to CFMAIL. Due to the different filename format there is ZERO POSSIBILTY for this email to overwrite email send by CFMAIL that might be residing in the spooldir. To be specific: cf_advancedemail uses cfset filename = RandRange(10,99).cfmail while cfmail has some sort of .cfmail format with X = hex. I may have to look into it writing to my own mail server spool directory rather than the ColdFusion mail spool directory to avoid the 65,535 email limit of CF. Have you tried anything like this? With this tag it is not limited anymore (at least not to 65536, I wouldn't bet on something above half a million without modifying the code). There are other limitations in the use of the CFMAIL spooldir (single threaded, only one SMTP server) but I will be happy to write something if somebody can come up with the specifics. Probably some sort of format attribute, which could be IIS SMTP or MDAEMON or whatever, together with a manually specified spooldir would work. Jochem ~~ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Version 2
Hallo, Where can i get software version 2 which integrated with ColdFusion for source control integration? ~~ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2
What I've found interesting about this discussion, is that I consider ColdFusion Studio to be a specialized text editor. Yes it does have wizards and buttons to make things 'easier' for those that are still in the learning stage, but it inserts CODE. that you then have to be able to understand and alter. The bonuses of CF Studio is a) the color coding and b) the handy reference of CF/HTML help files built in. (Not to mention the RDS debugging, etc). The drawback as has been rightly pointed out is the inherent instability these type of environments seem to have :( Oh and btw, Dreamweaver is very nice, and IF you set things right in the preferences, doesn't mangle existing code! I despise FrontPage and have for years, but Dreamweaver is the tops in WYSIWYG choices. Please direct all responses to the newsgroup so that all may benefit from my lack of wisdom! -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
Re: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2
I have to disagree with you on this one. I use both DW and CF and switch back and forth between the two on a regular basis. You can set up Dreamweaver to ignore CF code quite easily in the Preferences using the HTML rewriting. The attitude that only a text based editor is the way to go reminds me of those who consider using a quill pen and parchment infinately superior to a word processor or even pen and paper. regards, larry -- Larry C. Lyons EBStor.com 8870 Rixlew Lane, Suite 201 Manassas, Virginia 20109-3795 tel: (703) 393-7930 x253 fax: (703) 393-2659 http://www.ebstor.com http://www.pacel.com email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message D09A1A0FB7FDD211A92D00805FBBD8A1190EF6@CLTNTSXCHANGE">news:D09A1A0FB7FDD211A92D00805FBBD8A1190EF6@CLTNTSXCHANGE... Yes DreamWrecker is still the best WYSIWYG out there but it destroys code no matter how you set it up. I've spend MANY, MANY days rewriting DreamWrecker generated code. Nothing can replace human generated code by a competent developer. * Mike Fleming CF Codeslinger "I spent my whole life not knowing what I want out of it, just chasing my tail. Now for the first time I know exactly what I want and who... that's the damnable misery of it." Tombstone -Original Message- From: Calvin Ward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 9:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 What I've found interesting about this discussion, is that I consider ColdFusion Studio to be a specialized text editor. Yes it does have wizards and buttons to make things 'easier' for those that are still in the learning stage, but it inserts CODE. that you then have to be able to understand and alter. The bonuses of CF Studio is a) the color coding and b) the handy reference of CF/HTML help files built in. (Not to mention the RDS debugging, etc). The drawback as has been rightly pointed out is the inherent instability these type of environments seem to have :( Oh and btw, Dreamweaver is very nice, and IF you set things right in the preferences, doesn't mangle existing code! I despise FrontPage and have for years, but Dreamweaver is the tops in WYSIWYG choices. Please direct all responses to the newsgroup so that all may benefit from my lack of wisdom! -- -- -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2
I have not used Version 3. In the early versions of 2, it would destroy CF related tags, most notably the cfif tag. It has gotten better as Dreamweaver has been updated and has integrated better with ColdFusion. I'm just old school I guess who likes to see well formatted, indented, neat and easily readable code. Everyone has their own opinion and can use the tools they choose to use :) * Mike Fleming CF Codeslinger "I spent my whole life not knowing what I want out of it, just chasing my tail. Now for the first time I know exactly what I want and who... that's the damnable misery of it." Tombstone -Original Message- From: Mack, Chris R [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 10:55 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 That is not the case. In version 3 it has an option to not touch the code for certain file extensions. The only time it changes the code is when you make a change. I have never seen a page "wrecked". If it was as bad as you say, why would so many professionals use it? I'm sure human generated code gets "wrecked" more often then any other form. Even by the most competent designers. It might be easier to correct since you can just backspace over your error, but errors are still made. IMHO using Homesite/CF Studio is not a text editor either. The only true text editors are vi/notepad. CF Studio is a tool that is just like Dreamweaver. It helps you with syntax, let's you know if you've used an invalid tag, etc. So creating a site in CF Studio is not the same as creating it in notepad. Some people do not have all day to generate a simple page by using notepad as their editor, some do. Dreamweaver has proven to be one of the best tools for creating sites, and will continue to be the best for a long time to come. Chris Mack -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 10:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 Yes DreamWrecker is still the best WYSIWYG out there but it destroys code no matter how you set it up. I've spend MANY, MANY days rewriting DreamWrecker generated code. Nothing can replace human generated code by a competent developer. * Mike Fleming CF Codeslinger "I spent my whole life not knowing what I want out of it, just chasing my tail. Now for the first time I know exactly what I want and who... that's the damnable misery of it." Tombstone -Original Message- From: Calvin Ward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 9:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 What I've found interesting about this discussion, is that I consider ColdFusion Studio to be a specialized text editor. Yes it does have wizards and buttons to make things 'easier' for those that are still in the learning stage, but it inserts CODE. that you then have to be able to understand and alter. The bonuses of CF Studio is a) the color coding and b) the handy reference of CF/HTML help files built in. (Not to mention the RDS debugging, etc). The drawback as has been rightly pointed out is the inherent instability these type of environments seem to have :( Oh and btw, Dreamweaver is very nice, and IF you set things right in the preferences, doesn't mangle existing code! I despise FrontPage and have for years, but Dreamweaver is the tops in WYSIWYG choices. Please direct all responses to the newsgroup so that all may benefit from my lack of wisdom! -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
Re: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2
That's interesting... Choose Edit/Preferences, uncheck everything and it won't touch your code no matter how much it dislikes it. I've used it in this fashion doing all sorts of strange htm/cfml stunts and code twisting... Just an FWIW... Please direct all responses to the newsgroup so that all may benefit from my lack of wisdom! - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 9:16 AM Subject: RE: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 Yes DreamWrecker is still the best WYSIWYG out there but it destroys code no matter how you set it up. I've spend MANY, MANY days rewriting DreamWrecker generated code. Nothing can replace human generated code by a competent developer. * Mike Fleming CF Codeslinger "I spent my whole life not knowing what I want out of it, just chasing my tail. Now for the first time I know exactly what I want and who... that's the damnable misery of it." Tombstone -Original Message- From: Calvin Ward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 9:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 What I've found interesting about this discussion, is that I consider ColdFusion Studio to be a specialized text editor. Yes it does have wizards and buttons to make things 'easier' for those that are still in the learning stage, but it inserts CODE. that you then have to be able to understand and alter. The bonuses of CF Studio is a) the color coding and b) the handy reference of CF/HTML help files built in. (Not to mention the RDS debugging, etc). The drawback as has been rightly pointed out is the inherent instability these type of environments seem to have :( Oh and btw, Dreamweaver is very nice, and IF you set things right in the preferences, doesn't mangle existing code! I despise FrontPage and have for years, but Dreamweaver is the tops in WYSIWYG choices. Please direct all responses to the newsgroup so that all may benefit from my lack of wisdom! -- -- -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2
Here's the deal, i'm so used to the keyboard mentality, that i just want to quick in and out... I do use other tools, to help with the database stuff like SQL Navigator 3, Benthic's Golden32 I just like the olde KISS standard of not using tools that do or have more than I really need. When I first got started in CF, Studio just took up more memory and time to learn, than just using a test editor to plug away and type and peck and hack at the coding... Now I'm not trying to say my approach is superior or meant for everyone...But I have noticed a Conformist Attitude towards everyone wanting to be a like I really dont't care to do things the way everyone else does... I like collecting little tools to do exactly and no more than what I need them to do...I dislike the feeling that studio is to the coding, what frontpage is to the web, a kludge application to help people do the code for them... I know that isn't true, but it feels like it...After having worked in Tech Support, and so many people who use Front Page demanded results without wanting to learn about how to get that results This may be totally inaccurate as to why people use it... CF Studio just feels like too much of a tool...I like simpler tools... This isn't a competition, but I was majorly curious as to if I was alone or not...in being a TextPad/ Text Editor user... It looks like I am to some extant...and that's okay... Are there any other tools people use other than studio for coding? like SQL Helpers and so on? Another trend I've noticed is that people who code like to listen to winamp or other music over the internet while working What do you do? -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2
I've been using UltraEdit 32 for a few years now, and love it for it's simplicity. The things that get me about studio is exactly what you mentioned: memory consumption, wasted screen space for useless functions, and the list goes on. There are quite a few other developers here at iXL that live in IDE's, and would probably feel a bit more comfortable in an environment with all those neat little buttons surrounding your code, but to be honest, I can type "!---" alot faster than I can pick up my mouse and move up to the CFML toolbar, just to comment some code. Winamp, MusicMatch and Spinner. These are required tools (along with a nice set of Sony Studio headphones.) I love them for their simplicity as well. Hrmp. ;-) -Original Message- From: Craig M. Rosenblum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 11:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 Here's the deal, i'm so used to the keyboard mentality, that i just want to quick in and out... I do use other tools, to help with the database stuff like SQL Navigator 3, Benthic's Golden32 I just like the olde KISS standard of not using tools that do or have more than I really need. When I first got started in CF, Studio just took up more memory and time to learn, than just using a test editor to plug away and type and peck and hack at the coding... Now I'm not trying to say my approach is superior or meant for everyone...But I have noticed a Conformist Attitude towards everyone wanting to be a like I really dont't care to do things the way everyone else does... I like collecting little tools to do exactly and no more than what I need them to do...I dislike the feeling that studio is to the coding, what frontpage is to the web, a kludge application to help people do the code for them... I know that isn't true, but it feels like it...After having worked in Tech Support, and so many people who use Front Page demanded results without wanting to learn about how to get that results This may be totally inaccurate as to why people use it... CF Studio just feels like too much of a tool...I like simpler tools... This isn't a competition, but I was majorly curious as to if I was alone or not...in being a TextPad/ Text Editor user... It looks like I am to some extant...and that's okay... Are there any other tools people use other than studio for coding? like SQL Helpers and so on? Another trend I've noticed is that people who code like to listen to winamp or other music over the internet while working What do you do? -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2
To answer the response below... I've been doing stuff with computers since 1980. Back in the good old CPM days when even a simple text editor by today's standards was considered elegant. In the late 80's some pretty cool programming editors came along that would allow huge files to be edited and integrated well with compilers. When winders (I'm from the south) came along, it seemed like a lot more trouble than it was worth. Then NT 3.1 hit, and after some reading, I began to see some reasons for a multithreaded operating system. Then in the 90's lots of good IDE's (Integrated Development Environment) were created by the makers of different programming languages. Microsoft's Visual Studio which includes IDE's for C++, VB, ASP, and Java is just one example. ColdFusion Studio 4.5 is the one I work in most of the time today. It seems that there are two issues here with the "what should I use to create my ColdFusion applications" question. 1 - Time. Is it faster to code with a simpler text editor (your choice, there are many good ones) or take the time to become proficient with ColdFusion Studio and take advantage of it's many labor saving tools. 2 - Reliable programming environment. The simpler text editor is usually rock solid. All IDE's that I have used have bugs. They will cause your computer to crash, or at best just the IDE will crash and will have to be restarted again. Personally, I prefer to take the time to learn the new IDE and take advantage of the tools built into it. Many prefer the opposite approach. That is, use the known rock solid editor and work without the benefit of tools. One final thought, thanks to someone who wrote earlier about Dreamweaver producing only html code. I'll have to try it. After some frustrating experience with MS FrontPage, Dreamweaver may be worth a test drive. OK, this is the final thought. I listen to music when there is lots of work to do, but it's not very creative. When I'm creating new stuff, give me a quite room. -Original Message- From: Craig M. Rosenblum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 11:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 Here's the deal, i'm so used to the keyboard mentality, that i just want to quick in and out... I do use other tools, to help with the database stuff like SQL Navigator 3, Benthic's Golden32 I just like the olde KISS standard of not using tools that do or have more than I really need. When I first got started in CF, Studio just took up more memory and time to learn, than just using a test editor to plug away and type and peck and hack at the coding... Now I'm not trying to say my approach is superior or meant for everyone...But I have noticed a Conformist Attitude towards everyone wanting to be a like I really dont't care to do things the way everyone else does... I like collecting little tools to do exactly and no more than what I need them to do...I dislike the feeling that studio is to the coding, what frontpage is to the web, a kludge application to help people do the code for them... I know that isn't true, but it feels like it...After having worked in Tech Support, and so many people who use Front Page demanded results without wanting to learn about how to get that results This may be totally inaccurate as to why people use it... CF Studio just feels like too much of a tool...I like simpler tools... This isn't a competition, but I was majorly curious as to if I was alone or not...in being a TextPad/ Text Editor user... It looks like I am to some extant...and that's okay... Are there any other tools people use other than studio for coding? like SQL Helpers and so on? Another trend I've noticed is that people who code like to listen to winamp or other music over the internet while working What do you do? -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
Re: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2
I like to get my cf coding done FASTER by dragging and dropping cfml code snips all over the place and then. I actually enter the outside world once in a while (ya know... sunlight) grab the horse from out in th meadow, hook ol bessie up to the carriage and take a buggy ride to the farmers market... milk a cow by hand, slaughter a another one for some steaks and while Im at it kill myself a chicken for some barbecue all the while listening to my walkman. Cuz ya know... that modernized store bought stuff and automobiles is for damn sissies.. The difference in the homesite/studio "tool" is.. it doesnt do the coding for you... it leverages the developers existing knowledge and lets them speed up the doing of many of the "mundane-brainless" tasks requireing excessive "typing". I dont think studio has taught anyone how to properly use session/application/server scoped variables and where to place them.. or stored proc's or code cfml etc... - it just saves time. Period. Being able to type real fast in Notepad or some other text editor doesnt make for a smarter better developer than someone who is able to leverage the tools in studio - its just makes them a better typist. Equating studio to cheating yourself of the knowledge learned by notepad coding doesnt fly. Well.. out a milk... gotta go... steve Here's the deal, i'm so used to the keyboard mentality, that i just want to quick in and out... I do use other tools, to help with the database stuff like SQL Navigator 3, Benthic's Golden32 I just like the olde KISS standard of not using tools that do or have more than I really need. When I first got started in CF, Studio just took up more memory and time to learn, than just using a test editor to plug away and type and peck and hack at the coding... Now I'm not trying to say my approach is superior or meant for everyone...But I have noticed a Conformist Attitude towards everyone wanting to be a like I really dont't care to do things the way everyone else does... I like collecting little tools to do exactly and no more than what I need them to do...I dislike the feeling that studio is to the coding, what frontpage is to the web, a kludge application to help people do the code for them... I know that isn't true, but it feels like it...After having worked in Tech Support, and so many people who use Front Page demanded results without wanting to learn about how to get that results This may be totally inaccurate as to why people use it... CF Studio just feels like too much of a tool...I like simpler tools... This isn't a competition, but I was majorly curious as to if I was alone or not...in being a TextPad/ Text Editor user... It looks like I am to some extant...and that's okay... Are there any other tools people use other than studio for coding? like SQL Helpers and so on? Another trend I've noticed is that people who code like to listen to winamp or other music over the internet while working What do you do? -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2
Create your own custom keyboard short cuts. Then you don't have to leave the keyboard and don't have to type long CF tags. Can even create keyboard shortcuts for your own custom tags! Michael W. Blair Web Applications Developer Canyon WebWorks An Arizona Internet LLC Company http://www.canyon.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] PHONE: (520) 773-9059 FAX: (520) 773-4945 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 10:16 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 I've been using UltraEdit 32 for a few years now, and love it for it's simplicity. The things that get me about studio is exactly what you mentioned: memory consumption, wasted screen space for useless functions, and the list goes on. There are quite a few other developers here at iXL that live in IDE's, and would probably feel a bit more comfortable in an environment with all those neat little buttons surrounding your code, but to be honest, I can type "!---" alot faster than I can pick up my mouse and move up to the CFML toolbar, just to comment some code. Winamp, MusicMatch and Spinner. These are required tools (along with a nice set of Sony Studio headphones.) I love them for their simplicity as well. Hrmp. ;-) -Original Message- From: Craig M. Rosenblum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 11:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 Here's the deal, i'm so used to the keyboard mentality, that i just want to quick in and out... I do use other tools, to help with the database stuff like SQL Navigator 3, Benthic's Golden32 I just like the olde KISS standard of not using tools that do or have more than I really need. When I first got started in CF, Studio just took up more memory and time to learn, than just using a test editor to plug away and type and peck and hack at the coding... Now I'm not trying to say my approach is superior or meant for everyone...But I have noticed a Conformist Attitude towards everyone wanting to be a like I really dont't care to do things the way everyone else does... I like collecting little tools to do exactly and no more than what I need them to do...I dislike the feeling that studio is to the coding, what frontpage is to the web, a kludge application to help people do the code for them... I know that isn't true, but it feels like it...After having worked in Tech Support, and so many people who use Front Page demanded results without wanting to learn about how to get that results This may be totally inaccurate as to why people use it... CF Studio just feels like too much of a tool...I like simpler tools... This isn't a competition, but I was majorly curious as to if I was alone or not...in being a TextPad/ Text Editor user... It looks like I am to some extant...and that's okay... Are there any other tools people use other than studio for coding? like SQL Helpers and so on? Another trend I've noticed is that people who code like to listen to winamp or other music over the internet while working What do you do? -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
RE: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2
I didn't mention that I type faster when I listen to music no matter what kind of music it is. Byron -Original Message- From: Craig M. Rosenblum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 11:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Text Editors vs Site Editors Version 2 Here's the deal, i'm so used to the keyboard mentality, that i just want to quick in and out... I do use other tools, to help with the database stuff like SQL Navigator 3, Benthic's Golden32 I just like the olde KISS standard of not using tools that do or have more than I really need. When I first got started in CF, Studio just took up more memory and time to learn, than just using a test editor to plug away and type and peck and hack at the coding... Now I'm not trying to say my approach is superior or meant for everyone...But I have noticed a Conformist Attitude towards everyone wanting to be a like I really dont't care to do things the way everyone else does... I like collecting little tools to do exactly and no more than what I need them to do...I dislike the feeling that studio is to the coding, what frontpage is to the web, a kludge application to help people do the code for them... I know that isn't true, but it feels like it...After having worked in Tech Support, and so many people who use Front Page demanded results without wanting to learn about how to get that results This may be totally inaccurate as to why people use it... CF Studio just feels like too much of a tool...I like simpler tools... This isn't a competition, but I was majorly curious as to if I was alone or not...in being a TextPad/ Text Editor user... It looks like I am to some extant...and that's okay... Are there any other tools people use other than studio for coding? like SQL Helpers and so on? Another trend I've noticed is that people who code like to listen to winamp or other music over the internet while working What do you do? -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. -- Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=listsbody=lists/cf_talk or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
