I don't want to gloss over what Zaph was talking about really, which
is trying to make one language behave like another.
We're creatures of habit, so it's an easy trap to fall into. Why
should we change, when we can just change the world instead? ;)
:Den
--
Listen to the cry of a woman in la
I know several languages. Frankly I'm of the opinion that every language I pick
up has made me a better programmer regardless of which language I'm using at
the moment. Java's not in my resume yet though. It's been on my need-to-learn
list for a while, but somehow every time I think I've got ti
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Its frustrating. Requirements and Specification docs? Use Cases? I
> suspect that they are mythical at times at least for this project.
>
> If we spend the time doing proper design and create class and sequence
> diagrams, I think that you
Its frustrating. Requirements and Specification docs? Use Cases? I
suspect that they are mythical at times at least for this project.
If we spend the time doing proper design and create class and sequence
diagrams, I think that you cut the overall effort by a third.
Frequently you end up catching
My supervisor likes to release it quick, "...Then we've got the project done
and we go into maintenance mode"
it kills me just a little each time I hear him say that.
On Jun 2, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Jerry Barnes wrote:
>
> "Agreed. This wasn't. You had display in act files, queries in display
>
My prediction, about the same as a snowball's chance in hell. No
design time, no proper UML. Just pure frustration.
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Jerry Barnes wrote:
>
> "Agreed. This wasn't. You had display in act files, queries in display
> files, no qry files. That and other ruffles and fl
"Agreed. This wasn't. You had display in act files, queries in display
files, no qry files. That and other ruffles and flourishes make the entire
thing a spaghetti code monster. Over 600 files of spaghetti code all mashed
together. What fun."
Let's just hope that they give you time to do it right
Agreed. This wasn't. You had display in act files, queries in display
files, no qry files. That and other ruffles and flourishes make the
entire thing a spaghetti code monster. Over 600 files of spaghetti
code all mashed together. What fun.
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox
wrote
"thanks I'd rather start from scratch, but the powers that be don't like the
idea."
I feel your pain.
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155
Technically, Larry, Fusebox II (done right) is an MVC framework.
On Jun 2, 2010, at 6:59 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>> The next stage is going to be the real challenge,
>> moving the whole thing into an MVC framework
~|
Order t
+1I'd say you can pick up *any* other language and see how they do things
differently and maybe try to incorporate those strategies into your cf
development.
on a side note, I wonder how many people on the cf-comm list aren't doing cf
dev anymore?
On Jun 2, 2010, at 1:27 AM, Chris Stone
thanks I'd rather start from scratch, but the powers that be don't
like the idea. I'll try to argue them into using something fairly
simple, such as using Sean Corfield's FW/1 framework. So far I've been
very impressed with it.
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Jerry Barnes wrote:
>
> "Don't remi
Well I spent the first 9ish years of my career doing CF. Spent the last 3
doing C#. I think what I have learned there has made me a much better
developer. And Its made me understand a lot more about what I didnt
understand when I was doing CF. So while pure OO in CF is not the best
option, the
I remember things like this. As the ColdFusion platform matured and CF
developers took on bigger and more complex projects, people in the
community recognized the need for more structured programming
techniques. Borrowing from Java, the language underlying the CF
platform, was a natural avenue to
i won't argue the value of design patterns, I use them everyday. What
my observations were was that it often seemed that it was "java
implements this pattern, how can we do that in cf"
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 1, 2010, at 6:22 PM, denstar wrote:
>
> The rub: the stuff with dependency in
"Don't remind me. I'm struggling with a site exactly like that. A simple
site that started life as a fuzebox 2 approach and then mutated into a
maintenance nightmare. The next stage is going to be the real challenge,
moving the whole thing into an MVC framework, removing duplicate code,
redundant
Yup. I came to patterns out of necessity.
You can only go on for so long with the simple stuff, before you're
like, there has *got* to be a better way. A different kind of simple,
perhaps.
It takes more in lead-up, as most things that make stuff easier down
the line do, but it's worth it, in t
Don't remind me. I'm struggling with a site exactly like that. A
simple site that started life as a fuzebox 2 approach and then mutated
into a maintenance nightmare. The next stage is going to be the real
challenge, moving the whole thing into an MVC framework, removing
duplicate code, redundant q
The rub: the stuff with dependency injection, MVC and whatnot are
design patterns, and not limited to language X.
"Simple" is only simple for so long. Then it's a maintenance nightmare.
:Den
--
The only theism worthy of our respect believes in God not because of
the way the world is made but
No arguments there. If it works for you, and get you through the night...
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox
wrote:
>
> I'm pretty sure he was joking...
>
> but to respond to about the blog, anytime someone suggests you learn java to
> understand cf better...well, that makes as m
I'm pretty sure he was joking...
but to respond to about the blog, anytime someone suggests you learn java to
understand cf better...well, that makes as much sense as telling a Chevy
mechanic that he needs to learn all about Kawasaki's in order to understand
Chevy's better.
Looking back at i
21 matches
Mail list logo
