[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
*nix TOC oops. I meant (unix-based) TCO (total Cost of ownership) ...I'm lysDexic On 5/8/06, Barry Beattie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: cf on linux may be cheaper then .net on windoze especially when you consider total cost of ownership what with Microsoft Licencing. Check it out- it ain't cheap. they lock you in with (virtually) free dev tools (anyone still got their freebie VS2005? mine's unloved...) and then sting you with the licence fees. IMHO, the only downside to linux-based is getting the expertise/Guru(s) to get the best out of it (the achillies heal on *nix TOC). A sysadmin friend of mine is doing amazing things at his work with FreeBSD, donated computers and a bunch of Win98 thin clients. Their sister business (MS everything) is one big blank check to write eh my 2c On 5/8/06, M@ Bourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hate to say it but my little team hear, may have to jump to .NET soon but I don't want to make that decesion. But if the clients want it we do it. Hi Jeremy very funny cfdump joke now if pricing is simply the only reason for changeing why not php or 1 of the many other free languages over .net? you already said they are using windoze, so no use me saying cf on linux may be cheaper then .net on windoze :S M@ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: DISTINCT not so distinct
I think categoryid needs to be in the group by clause if you are going to use max() on it. Chris -- Chris Velevitch Manager - Sydney Flash Platform Developers Group www.flashdev.org.au --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: DISTINCT not so distinct
MAX(dc.categoryID) needs to be aliased so MAX(dc.categoryID), AS CategoryID otherwise the column will come back as a temp named column -Original Message-From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Seona BellamySent: Monday, May 08, 2006 3:57 PMTo: cfaussie@googlegroups.comSubject: [cfaussie] Re: DISTINCT not so distinctOn 08/05/06, Lucas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yeah, as you are using a MAX() you are going to need a group by...try...group by d.docTitle, d.docIntro, d.docContent, d.docImage, d.ID Hmm I changed the query to this: SELECT DISTINCT(d.docTitle), d.docIntro, d.docContent, d.docImage, MAX(dc.categoryID), d.ID FROM r_document AS d,r_docByType AS dt,r_docByCategory AS dc WHERE dt.docTypeID = 1 AND dt.documentID = d.ID ANDdc.documentID = d.ID GROUP BY d.docTitle, d.docIntro, d.docContent, d.docImage, d.ID ORDER BY d.dateEntered DESC LIMIT 3What I got was the following error:Variable CATEGORYID is undefined. brThe error occurred on line 22. This is referring to the place where I try and insert the category ID into the "Read more" link in the display. So it looks as though the "Max" bit is stopping the query from finding that one properly.Any suggestions?Seona. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
We need a language that is not only quick and easy to develop in, but also easy to debug and maintain long term. agreed! http://www.techfeed.net/blog/index.cfm/2006/3/28/PHP-Debugging-is-Better-Than-ColdFusion On 5/8/06, Dale Fraser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sad, so sad. I have to say, that if CF 8 isn't oo and doesn't have break point debugging, I too will be moving all our development to .NET The cost is an issue to some, but for me it's the language and tools that hurts the most. PHP, JSP .NET are Free full OO, with break point debugging. CF is much more rapid for development which may justify the not free bit, but there is no excuse for the lack of OO and break point bits. Why even wait for CF8? Well there is a bit of me that hopes they make CF fully CFSCRIPT available, with more OO and break point debugging and I know they are thinking about these issues. But I'm mainly wanting to see which way they go. If CF8 comes out as lots more Flash Flex stuff, then I'm on the wrong ship. We need a language that is not only quick and easy to develop in, but also easy to debug and maintain long term. PS: Non CF people looking at code like cfloop from=1 just turn their nose up at the language. If CF supported CFSCRIPT syntax for everything, then this would not be an issue. Ie for (i=0; i10; i++) is familiar across languages. Regards Dale Fraser From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of M@ Bourke Sent: Monday, 8 May 2006 14:53 PM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone? I hate to say it but my little team hear, may have to jump to .NET soon but I don't want to make that decesion. But if the clients want it we do it. Hi Jeremy very funny cfdump joke now if pricing is simply the only reason for changeing why not php or 1 of the many other free languages over .net? you already said they are using windoze, so no use me saying cf on linux may be cheaper then .net on windoze :S M@ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
Yep, I mention it as often as possible in blogs also, hoping it will get picked up. If you read bens comment in your link, it sounds like they might give us something like this in 8, he hints at it. I'm no guru, but java has it and CF runs on java, so it should be easy :) I'd also imagine taking the 10% of stuff you cant do with CFSCRIPT and including this would be easy, but I've read posts from Ben hinting cfscript wont be supported long term (perhaps something else) java, EMCAS, action script. Just have a tagless option anyway. Regards Dale Fraser -Original Message- From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barry Beattie Sent: Monday, 8 May 2006 16:17 PM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone? We need a language that is not only quick and easy to develop in, but also easy to debug and maintain long term. agreed! http://www.techfeed.net/blog/index.cfm/2006/3/28/PHP-Debugging-is-Better-Tha n-ColdFusion On 5/8/06, Dale Fraser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sad, so sad. I have to say, that if CF 8 isn't oo and doesn't have break point debugging, I too will be moving all our development to .NET The cost is an issue to some, but for me it's the language and tools that hurts the most. PHP, JSP .NET are Free full OO, with break point debugging. CF is much more rapid for development which may justify the not free bit, but there is no excuse for the lack of OO and break point bits. Why even wait for CF8? Well there is a bit of me that hopes they make CF fully CFSCRIPT available, with more OO and break point debugging and I know they are thinking about these issues. But I'm mainly wanting to see which way they go. If CF8 comes out as lots more Flash Flex stuff, then I'm on the wrong ship. We need a language that is not only quick and easy to develop in, but also easy to debug and maintain long term. PS: Non CF people looking at code like cfloop from=1 just turn their nose up at the language. If CF supported CFSCRIPT syntax for everything, then this would not be an issue. Ie for (i=0; i10; i++) is familiar across languages. Regards Dale Fraser From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of M@ Bourke Sent: Monday, 8 May 2006 14:53 PM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone? I hate to say it but my little team hear, may have to jump to .NET soon but I don't want to make that decesion. But if the clients want it we do it. Hi Jeremy very funny cfdump joke now if pricing is simply the only reason for changeing why not php or 1 of the many other free languages over .net? you already said they are using windoze, so no use me saying cf on linux may be cheaper then .net on windoze :S M@ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
Some how I don't think it would be easy for them to do, but plenty of people have requested it, so hopefully its something they are looking in to. I think if Adobe were more open about the java that Coldfusion creates, you could probably use some sort of java debugging and trace it back to the coldfusion source. Or maybe Adobe could create something that traces the java back to the source for you? *shrugs* Cheers Gareth. Dale Fraser wrote: Yep, I mention it as often as possible in blogs also, hoping it will get picked up. If you read bens comment in your link, it sounds like they might give us something like this in 8, he hints at it. I'm no guru, but java has it and CF runs on java, so it should be easy :) I'd also imagine taking the 10% of stuff you cant do with CFSCRIPT and including this would be easy, but I've read posts from Ben hinting cfscript wont be supported long term (perhaps something else) java, EMCAS, action script. Just have a tagless option anyway. Regards Dale Fraser -Original Message- From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:cfaussie@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Barry Beattie Sent: Monday, 8 May 2006 16:17 PM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone? We need a language that is not only quick and easy to develop in, but also easy to debug and maintain long term. agreed! http://www.techfeed.net/blog/index.cfm/2006/3/28/PHP-Debugging-is-Better-Tha n-ColdFusion On 5/8/06, Dale Fraser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sad, so sad. I have to say, that if CF 8 isn't oo and doesn't have break point debugging, I too will be moving all our development to .NET The cost is an issue to some, but for me it's the language and tools that hurts the most. PHP, JSP .NET are Free full OO, with break point debugging. CF is much more rapid for development which may justify the not free bit, but there is no excuse for the lack of OO and break point bits. Why even wait for CF8? Well there is a bit of me that hopes they make CF fully CFSCRIPT available, with more OO and break point debugging and I know they are thinking about these issues. But I'm mainly wanting to see which way they go. If CF8 comes out as lots more Flash Flex stuff, then I'm on the wrong ship. We need a language that is not only quick and easy to develop in, but also easy to debug and maintain long term. PS: Non CF people looking at code like cfloop from="1" just turn their nose up at the language. If CF supported CFSCRIPT syntax for everything, then this would not be an issue. Ie for (i=0; i10; i++) is familiar across languages. Regards Dale Fraser From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:cfaussie@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of M@ Bourke Sent: Monday, 8 May 2006 14:53 PM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone? I hate to say it but my little team hear, may have to jump to .NET soon but I don't want to make that decesion. But if the clients want it we do it. Hi Jeremy very funny cfdump joke now if pricing is simply the only reason for changeing why not php or 1 of the many other free languages over .net? you already said they are using windoze, so no use me saying cf on linux may be cheaper then .net on windoze :S M@ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
On the subject of acronyms: CLAP - Coldfusion, Linux, Apache, PostgreSQL - A combination that works well for me. Be careful communicating this acronym to management if english is not your first language :) Vorn. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
On 5/8/06, M@ Bourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: now if pricing is simply the only reason for changeing why not php or 1 of the many other free languages over .net? you already said they are using windoze, so no use me saying cf on linux may be cheaper then .net on windoze :S When you consider a lot of Windows Sys Admins are MCSE's configuring PHP, MySQL, Ruby, Python or even Java isn't exactly going to be high on their skill set. To be a windows admin you would defiantly need to know how to set up IIS. Running .net is not much more than that (compared to some other environments). Even if Linux BSD or Solaris (10)are cheaper than Windows, if you want the support you have to pay a license fee as well. How do you think Red Hat and SuSE make most of their money? The point I'm trying to make is, if the company has already made a sizable infrastructure investment based on Windows (including staff) then switching to Linux or even PHP can be quiet expensive. Retraining and time lost reconfiguring and testing server environments can quiet quickly cost a company a lot of money. I have worked for a company that was a Microsoft Certified Partner and the piles of software that were shipped in at low prices was amazing. I am a part of partnership that is a Microsoft Partner and for a small fee (much less than a CF Standard license) we can become a Microsoft Empower partner and receive licenses for server software to set up everything we need to have a complete MS environment plus dev tools. There is always a good argument for the*NIX options but the current situation of the company in question has to be addressed. My 2c Shane --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
I've actually fantasied taking that 10%, wrapping in functions, and injecting in on startup to web-inf.component. Or extend web-inf.component, and include those methods, and have all my code extend the new and improved component. Has anyone done this yet? If not, why? Dale Fraser wrote: I'd also imagine taking the 10% of stuff you cant do with CFSCRIPT and including this would be easy. *snip* -- Haikal Saadh, Applications Programmer Teaching and Learning Support Services K405, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus [EMAIL PROTECTED], 3864 8633 CRICOS No. 00213J --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
I've had the exact same thoughts, more along the lines of writing the code in a familiar like java and preparsing / compiling the code back to cf stuff. It wouldn't be that hard, I was thinking supporting a simple java syntax rather than cfscript so that I could get rid of those pesky gt lt bits. Only thing stopping me from doing that is version 8. Hopefully it will do this for me or similar. Regards Dale Fraser -Original Message- From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Haikal Saadh Sent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 09:47 AM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone? I've actually fantasied taking that 10%, wrapping in functions, and injecting in on startup to web-inf.component. Or extend web-inf.component, and include those methods, and have all my code extend the new and improved component. Has anyone done this yet? If not, why? Dale Fraser wrote: I'd also imagine taking the 10% of stuff you cant do with CFSCRIPT and including this would be easy. *snip* -- Haikal Saadh, Applications Programmer Teaching and Learning Support Services K405, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus [EMAIL PROTECTED], 3864 8633 CRICOS No. 00213J --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
Slightly off topic, but in my tutorial last night we were talking about organisational culture and politics in different industries. People in my tutorial come from a broad range of backgrounds, including government departments, large management firms, research companies, and IT. Were were asked to list the things that cause conflict in our industry. Myself and another programmer, and an ex-sysadmin did some brainstorming. It turned out that IT had almost double the amount of things to argue about than any other industry. We argued about technologies, methods, trends, management structures, profitability and efficiency, amongst others. It was voted that workers in the IT industry had the greatest amount of political challenges, these were fueled by internal and external factors (e.g. We should all be using .net because most of our staff know it vs. We should all be using .net because our customers want it). It seems that we become stuck in the middle and the only real way to solve things (in a perfect world) is to collaborate. I.e. with web services (in a perfect world), .net and Java could talk with CF, without the need for extensive integration. CF could be used for it's web development strengths, and PHP, java, and .net used for their OO strengths. The problem is that we do not want to work together. Makes me wonder, why can't we all be friends? My two cents (balance = 7c) Joel -Original Message- From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Haikal Saadh Sent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 9:47 AM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone? I've actually fantasied taking that 10%, wrapping in functions, and injecting in on startup to web-inf.component. Or extend web-inf.component, and include those methods, and have all my code extend the new and improved component. Has anyone done this yet? If not, why? Dale Fraser wrote: I'd also imagine taking the 10% of stuff you cant do with CFSCRIPT and including this would be easy. *snip* -- Haikal Saadh, Applications Programmer Teaching and Learning Support Services K405, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus [EMAIL PROTECTED], 3864 8633 CRICOS No. 00213J --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
The last time there was the whole cfscript debate we found the majority more often used the tags then scripting corfields breeze thingo had a poll that showed this.hence the M in the CFMSome people want CFM to be so much like other languages that they could simply use those other languages, Personally I mainly use cfscript for constructors and the odd var setting here and there.Although there is times I use it for more then that but the above takes up about 80% of my cfscript usageM@ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
Most customers wouldn't know what's good for them if they got run over a B-double full of it :D /Philosophy seems to work for 37 Signals... Joel Cass wrote: *snip* We should all be using .net because our customers want it). *snip* --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
The reason most people dont use cfscript is because its incomplete. If it supported everything, especially in cfcs I think most developers would code all cfcs in cfscript where ideally there should be no HTML if your separating your view and model. Regards Dale Fraser From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of M@ Bourke Sent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 10:24 AM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone? The last time there was the whole cfscript debate we found the majority more often used the tags then scripting corfields breeze thingo had a poll that showed this. hence the M in the CFM Some people want CFM to be so much like other languages that they could simply use those other languages, Personally I mainly use cfscript for constructors and the odd var setting here and there. Although there is times I use it for more then that but the above takes up about 80% of my cfscript usage M@ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
I also think that break points are an extremely long shot. awww... Mark, that's mean! I can dream, can't I? at least your beanie isn't worried forbeing your next meal... BTW, they *have* been looking into debugging hooks, it's just not easy to implement at the moment. one of those decisions way back when (C++ to java re-write) that's hard to reverse. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
I've had something like this on the backburner for a while - create a tag to enclose snippets of Java code. The tag wraps the code with appropriate Java class header/footers, saves it in a temp file, creates an instance of javac and compiles the temporary file, instantiates the resulting class and calls it. You could hash the source code and use the hash string in the temp file and class names to save unnecessary recompiles if the temporary class or source already existed. Robin __ Robin Hilliard Director - RocketBoots Pty Ltd Consulting . Software Licensing . Recruitment . Training http://www.rocketboots.com.au For schedule/availability call Pamela Higgins: w+61 7 5451 0362 m+61 419 677 151 f+61 3 9923 6261 e[EMAIL PROTECTED] or Direct: m+61 418 414 341 e[EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Worldwide Adobe Licensing - Volume discounts now start at one point *** On 09/05/2006, at 10:05 AM, Dale Fraser wrote: I've had the exact same thoughts, more along the lines of writing the code in a familiar like java and preparsing / compiling the code back to cf stuff. It wouldn't be that hard, I was thinking supporting a simple java syntax rather than cfscript so that I could get rid of those pesky gt lt bits. Only thing stopping me from doing that is version 8. Hopefully it will do this for me or similar. Regards Dale Fraser -Original Message- From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Haikal Saadh Sent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 09:47 AM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone? I've actually fantasied taking that 10%, wrapping in functions, and injecting in on startup to web-inf.component. Or extend web-inf.component, and include those methods, and have all my code extend the new and improved component. Has anyone done this yet? If not, why? Dale Fraser wrote: I'd also imagine taking the 10% of stuff you cant do with CFSCRIPT and including this would be easy. *snip* -- Haikal Saadh, Applications Programmer Teaching and Learning Support Services K405, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus [EMAIL PROTECTED], 3864 8633 CRICOS No. 00213J --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
Many people (myself included) have raised this issue before. Just make CFSCRIPT ECMA compliant (at least in regard to operators).It would HAVE to be a very simply thing to do but MM/ADOBE have always said there were bigger fish to fry. I guess with the upsurge in AJAX (and more people getting into JS now than ever before) it is starting to annoy enough people that we might get listened to.Regards,Gary On 5/9/06, Robin Hilliard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've had something like this on the backburner for a while - create atag to enclose snippets of Java code.The tag wraps the code withappropriate Java class header/footers, saves it in a temp file,creates an instance of javac and compiles the temporary file, instantiates the resulting class and calls it.You could hash thesource code and use the hash string in the temp file and class namesto save unnecessary recompiles if the temporary class or sourcealready existed. Robin__Robin HilliardDirector - RocketBoots Pty LtdConsulting . Software Licensing . Recruitment . Traininghttp://www.rocketboots.com.au For schedule/availability call Pamela Higgins:w+61 7 5451 0362m+61 419 677 151f+61 3 9923 6261e[EMAIL PROTECTED]or Direct: m+61 418 414 341e[EMAIL PROTECTED]*** Worldwide Adobe Licensing - Volume discounts now start at onepoint ***On 09/05/2006, at 10:05 AM, Dale Fraser wrote: I've had the exact same thoughts, more along the lines of writing the code in a familiar like java and preparsing / compiling the code back to cf stuff. It wouldn't be that hard, I was thinking supporting a simple java syntax rather than cfscript so that I could get rid of those pesky gt lt bits. Only thing stopping me from doing that is version 8. Hopefully it will do this for me or similar. Regards Dale Fraser -Original Message- From: cfaussie@googlegroups.com [mailto: cfaussie@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Haikal Saadh Sent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 09:47 AM To: cfaussie@googlegroups.com Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone? I've actually fantasied taking that 10%, wrapping in functions, and injecting in on startup to web-inf.component. Or extend web-inf.component, and include those methods, and have all my code extend the new and improved component. Has anyone done this yet? If not, why? Dale Fraser wrote: I'd also imagine taking the 10% of stuff you cant do with CFSCRIPT and including this would be easy. *snip* -- Haikal Saadh, Applications Programmer Teaching and Learning Support Services K405, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus [EMAIL PROTECTED], 3864 8633 CRICOS No. 00213J --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] [OT] Flex2 Beta 3
Its out! http://labs.adobe.com Not sure how many people on this list have been playing with it, but I'm a little frustrated they removed the functions setCapture() and releaseCapture() Cos... I'm a newbie and they were really handy functions to use to capture the events for something on the screen. *sigh* Can't seem to work the alternative very well (Although I only had a 5 minute look at it) could be some other change thats broken my program, not sure. Oh well. Cheers Gareth. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
Hey Gary - ECMA compliance will break existing cfscript MM/Adobe won't break backward compatibility in CF. - I doubt very much whether writing/implementing a language/syntax and all the stuff that goes with it could ever be called an easy thing to do. Maybe your definition of easy is a little different to mine. People often forget that CF is geared towards entry level web development - make pdf's and reports in 5 minutes is the sweet spot for CF - not proper OO, or more elegant/advanced language features. Look at CF7, which I consider the first real version since about CF4 (the other versions where just steps in the long migration to java) - all the new features are geared towards entry level, impress your boss type stuff. The market beyond this is very crowded (java, .net, etc...) - why would mm go in there and try to compete with that. They have listened to people like us saying they want more true oo, etc.. and so they gave us native java support. MM/Adobe see Flash Flex are the areas where they can throw a lot of budget and expect returns because they are alone in their market, there is no direct competition. If they can expand this market by convincing J2EE and Mobile people that Flash is right for the UI - they are all along and have the chance to cash in big time. CF is in a very different place to this - MM/Adobe will continue to support it as long as it turns a profit, but I don't think they really see it as a game changer for them so they are not about to pour heaps of resources into ramping it up. I'd expect a whole lot more Flex/PDF integration in the next CF. Maybe some token geeky stuff like interfaces, but not much more. There is no way you are going to see the type of effort go into the CF language that you have seen in AS over the past few years. I wouldn't hold your breath for any significant change of direction here. -- Mark Stanton Gruden Pty Ltd http://www.gruden.com --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
They can retain the GT/LT for backwards compatibility.And, adding new or alternative operators to a parser IS easy - if you have written the parser correctly (I've built enough of them in the past to know this). Yes, fully ECMA compliant, and fully backwards compatible would be a BIG ask.But - if we ask for the world, we MIGHT just get some sensible operators into CFSCRIPT.I did hear/read some rumour on CFAUSSIE (at some point recently) that they MAY be considering a few small changes to CFSCRIPT like the one just mentioned. As well as looking seriously at INTERFACES for CFC's. I'd be happy with those (that is, of course, until I have those and I want something else).GaryOn 5/9/06, Mark Stanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hey Gary- ECMA compliance will break existing cfscript MM/Adobe won't break backward compatibility in CF.- I doubt very much whether writing/implementing a language/syntax andall the stuff that goes with it could ever be called an easy thing todo. Maybe your definition of easy is a little different to mine. People often forget that CF is geared towards entry level webdevelopment - make pdf's and reports in 5 minutes is the sweet spotfor CF - not proper OO, or more elegant/advanced language features. Look at CF7, which I consider the first real version since about CF4(the other versions where just steps in the long migration to java) -all the new features are geared towards entry level, impress your boss type stuff.The market beyond this is very crowded (java, .net, etc...) - whywould mm go in there and try to compete with that. They have listenedto people like us saying they want more true oo, etc.. and so they gave us native java support.MM/Adobe see Flash Flex are the areas where they can throw a lot ofbudget and expect returns because they are alone in their market,there is no direct competition. If they can expand this market by convincing J2EE and Mobile people that Flash is right for the UI -they are all along and have the chance to cash in big time.CF is in a very different place to this - MM/Adobe will continue tosupport it as long as it turns a profit, but I don't think they really see it as a game changer for them so they are not about to pour heapsof resources into ramping it up.I'd expect a whole lot more Flex/PDF integration in the next CF. Maybesome token geeky stuff like interfaces, but not much more. There is no way you are going to see the type of effort go into the CF languagethat you have seen in AS over the past few years.I wouldn't hold your breath for any significant change of direction here.--Mark Stanton Gruden Pty Ltdhttp://www.gruden.com --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] ECMA and script (was Re: [cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?)
An easy solution to that would be to have ecmascript or maybe even actionscript? - ECMA compliance will break existing cfscript MM/Adobe won't break backward compatibility in CF. -- Haikal Saadh, Applications Programmer Teaching and Learning Support Services K405, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove Campus [EMAIL PROTECTED], 3864 8633 CRICOS No. 00213J --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: [OT] Flex2 Beta 3
I had a brief dab/look over the sample appsstill am yet to run accross a flash app that I think is better then an html app to be honest.back in 2001 I thought flash was gunna be the be all and end all of everything but from my perspectice (someone who doesn't follow flash) it hasn't done anything in the last 5 years except for flash video of which I actually love. Now I'm sure it has done heaps... But.. there is nothing that has caught my eye and made me think w0w now its finally the must usealthough I'm sure there would be a lot of really good intranet apps out there done in flex. M@ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups cfaussie group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[cfaussie] Re: Where have all the CF developers gone?
On 5/9/06, Mark Stanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: People often forget that CF is geared towards entry level web development - make pdf's and reports in 5 minutes is the sweet spot for CF - not proper OO, or more elegant/advanced language features. Not really, ASP is the same overall when you start hashing out server-side code its pretty much down to the point of automating HTML output and thats its sole responsibility the rest is bi-product / value add. The semantics of how this gets done will end up being a debate for the fools to enjoy heh. ASP.NET has a lot more going for it, as simply put its a no brainer to get going and if you're hosting in a Windows Server - which lets face it, a lot of folks tend to do that anyway simply because IT Admins would prefer locking down the hardware running beefier solutions built on say SAP or something along those lines. Coldfusion on the flip side, is quite unique and powerful unto its own, as its quite an easy language and if one was to adjust their perspective you could probably argue its more of a business processing lanugage then web. I see it as a workflow, a buffer between client and backend complexities. Look at CF7, which I consider the first real version since about CF4 (the other versions where just steps in the long migration to java) - all the new features are geared towards entry level, impress your boss type stuff. Agreed and it's also got more hooks to delve a little deeper into the forbidden waters of insert your bloated enterprise system here. The market beyond this is very crowded (java, .net, etc...) - why would mm go in there and try to compete with that. They have listened to people like us saying they want more true oo, etc.. and so they gave us native java support. Which is the funniest part of all, in that the CF'ers out there do as you say, crave more OO and yet the Java folks out there crave an easier to way cut back on over-engineered OO frameworks. I mean, look at concepts like SpringFramework which is one of the picks to get the job's done faster - yet Coldfusion is really a framework if you will ontop of java thus negates the need to invest in some weird conjured up dependency injection based approach. Simply get your hands dirty when its needed for complex and more advanced things but at the same time, put your feet up and hit cruise control when you're simply sending packets of data around the shop (via coldfusion). Right tool right job. The problem with this equation is, most CF developers aren't schooled up in Java or tend to shy away from it simply because it looks like a lot of work to get stuff done and at times thats why the push exists for more OO goodness in Coldfusion. I can kind of understand even at times code in java, but i can really apperciate the reasons as to why people resist against the if you want CF to do more OO centric things, then use java arguements. CF could strike a blance. I think there is a lot of flexability in the language to date and all would be really surprised to find out that CFC's at times are still foriegn to a lot of CF-shops. I know this personally as i've walked into two in the last year or so and ended up being the CFC teacher? That aside, its got that goodness its simply a pick your flavour - procedure or CFOO MM/Adobe see Flash Flex are the areas where they can throw a lot of budget and expect returns because they are alone in their market, there is no direct competition. If they can expand this market by convincing J2EE and Mobile people that Flash is right for the UI - they are all along and have the chance to cash in big time. Agreed. Also with the introduction of FLEX 2 and more and more Server-side based hooks for FLEX who knows what the space could end up like. CF could be ear marked for much greater things. Its really early days to be honest to wager what Adobe percieve is their future as from what i'm seeing and hearing around the shop, they appear to have some internal growing pains to overcome and while MM had that face to face contact of ages past, Adobe kind of appears to be shying away from this. As a result this could alienate or stimulate new blood thus depending how the winds blowing could help shift perceptions and focus overall. CF is in a very different place to this - MM/Adobe will continue to support it as long as it turns a profit, but I don't think they really see it as a game changer for them so they are not about to pour heaps of resources into ramping it up. It's too well seeded to simply cull it and turn over a new leaf. It would be brand suicide to even hint at that now, if anything you'll probably see some other 3rd party approach to the problems that CF solves and it will slowly sufficate it - which - by that time most may simply be happy with. I'd probably be more inclinded to watch the Flex pieces with more attention and focus as at the end of the day, take the visual element away from Coldfusion and whats it doing?
