;
(the temp variable makes it easier to read the code!)
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http
On Monday, September 2, 2002, at 10:28 , Jeffry Houser wrote:
:hmm: That is interesting. I don't like un-named scopes. I wish
someone at Macromedia took a little time to document this stuff.
I did, it's on my blog :) But I know what you mean! The bug is that
'variables' scope inside a
On Monday, September 2, 2002, at 12:52 , Hal Helms wrote:
Not having this ability means
that we have to resort to all sorts of workarounds while a standard OO
implementation of overloading would eliminate this problem.
Overloading has *nothing* to do with OO! Overloading is a language feature
referred to as Smalltalk in C clothing. C++ is a
multi-paradigm language, not a pure OO language (and has never claimed to
be pure OO).
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
is NOT APPROPRIATE for typeless languages.
You can already call a function with different numbers of arguments (and
types, if you want).
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
this is *not* a private scope specifically in any OO language I
can think of, I think your expectations are wrong - based on lack of
knowledge of other OO languages perhaps?
As myself and Matt have pointed out, overloading belongs in strongly typed
languages, not typeless ones.
Sean A Corfield -- http
All this simply argues that reusing the same name in different scopes is
rightly considered bad practice. Note that this collision is *exactly* the
same as in Java where arguments scope takes priority over instance scope.
On Monday, September 2, 2002, at 01:29 , Hal Helms wrote:
Look at this
On Monday, September 2, 2002, at 01:37 , Hal Helms wrote:
True, Sean, but not having overloading in an OO language seems baffling,
at least to me.
One thing I'll say about overloading - it can be frighteningly complicated
and very difficult for even fairly good C++ (or Java) programmers to
with return type and argument type
checking???
Hal, I don't mean to be rude, but can you actually program in Java and /
or C++?
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
can't
specify access on variables.
Yes, it would be nice if cfproperty affected 'this' scope variables. But
it doesn't. cfproperty just defines class metadata.
CF behaves a particular way. Let's just get over, OK?
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody
are taking some of the approaches to issues that you are... Humor me.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
Signup for the Fusion
On Monday, September 2, 2002, at 03:29 , Jeffry Houser wrote:
The book is Object Oriented Programming by Timothy Budd. It is an older
one (1991 if memory serves me).
He releases an update every few years. The latest edition is October 2001.
It would be interesting to see how much it
Yes, these examples exploit the (well-publicized) bug that variables scope
is broken in components and instead refers to the caller's variables scope.
When we fix that bug, variables will 'do the right thing' and become the
private scope everyone wants to see - mirroring the unnamed scope /
On Monday, September 2, 2002, at 07:18 , Parker, Kevin wrote:
Just in passing I was looking/searching for some stuff on Macromedia's web
site and found this - Powered by Atomz. Would have thought they'd be
using
Verity
The former Allaire site is powered by Verity since it is written in
Thanx for letting me know. I'll get someone to look at it as soon as I get
into the office this morning.
On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 11:01 , Chris Kief wrote:
FYI...Sean or anybody else from MM listening in...
It seems all the examples are no longer working on the CF examples site
(as
On Saturday, August 31, 2002, at 02:25 , Benoit Hediard wrote:
There was a very interesting article in InternetWeek on tuesday : Laszlo
Rising: The Inside Story Of A Stealth Vendor's Rich App Plans
(http://www.internetweek.com/story/INW20020827S0008).
Yes, this was circulated internally. It's
On Sunday, September 1, 2002, at 08:57 , Joe Eugene wrote:
Does Flash add any more USABILITY to existing critical applications...?
Yes. The HTML-based web experience is not exactly ideal... Look at the
scenario of booking a flight, for example. See how many pages you have to
click through
-validated C compiler,
spent eight years on the ISO C++ Standards Committee - three as secretary
- designing parts of that language and also worked on the UK and ISO Java
Study Groups for a couple of years as well? :)
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying
applications with Flash MX but you
would not be able to use Flash Remoting (NetServices). However, you could
still invoke CF pages running on 4.5.2 and you could return XML from CF to
Flash.
It depends on what features you want to be able to use...
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog
On Sunday, September 1, 2002, at 11:17 , Douglas Brown wrote:
I felt the need to chime in on this with a question. I am thinking of
designing an ecommerce app and would like the entire site to be done in
flash. One of the things that concerns me is the indexing by search
engines...If I go
On Sunday, September 1, 2002, at 02:14 , Joe Eugene wrote:
Sounds like an Applet
Perhaps, although Applet UIs tend to be larger downloads - and Java
support is not actually as solid as Flash support in browsers.
download the entire dataset to the user and have a static
on that. It'll be interesting to see what
take up it gets.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert
Is cf-talk alive yet?
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.
FAQ:
any tag or function for more information gives you this:
No primary examples were found for this language element.
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really
Tell your user he probably needs to change the preferences in DW to save
files using a different line ending (it can save as Unix, Mac or Windows)
.
On Friday, August 30, 2002, at 06:26 , Bartee Lamar wrote:
I have function where a user uploads an HTML file. This gets saved on
server as
I've forwarded this directly to the engineering folks responsible and
will keep you posted...
On Friday, August 30, 2002, at 05:33 , Robert Everland wrote:
I have emailed the site administrator a few times about this to no avail,
so
hopefully someone on the list at Macromedia sees this
opt for /app or /data
depending on the software. At some point I may expend the effort to
move my install to /data/www/appserver/coldfusionmx/ since that is what
I'm used to (with the web server at /data/www/httpd/apache/!).
I have no yet had time to do more with web services on OSX...
Sean
On Friday, August 30, 2002, at 10:35 , Jeffry Houser wrote:
I think this is too good of a topic to pass up, and I haven't seen any
other responses, so.. I'll give it a shot.
Well, I was drafting a reply but didn't have time to finish it... and
you'
ve actually said most of what I was
This bounced when I first tried to send it :(
On Friday, August 30, 2002, at 06:48 , Sean A Corfield wrote:
On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 05:35 , Jason Miller wrote:
Back Button -
Add this to frame1
...
Then - attach this to your Back graphical button
You don't need to - Flash MX lets
On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 03:13 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For reasons that elude me, some people devote great energy to evangelizing
Fusebox. When you ask them, it almost always turns out that they have
never
actually used anything else. Fusebox is about brainwashing developers,
On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 07:59 , Ben Johnson wrote:
what about Macromedia encouraging the use of it in Flash MX?
My life is a constant battle to stamp out this evil practice. And, yes, I
berate the internal people for this constantly! Some of them listen, some
agree with me. I'm
, Sean A Corfield wrote:
You need to search the ColdFusion Support Center. The easiest way from the
mm.com home page is:
mouse over support tab (lhs of Flash movie)
click on SHORT CUTS
enter cfcontent in the search box
select COLDFUSION from the drop-down
click
On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 05:31 , Everett, Al wrote:
On a site I was working on recently, upwards of 90% of the visitors were
using IE.
My blog gets:
IE6 58%
IE5 28% _ 86%
NS5 10% 14%
NS4 3%
NS? 1%
My site as a whole gets:
On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 07:18 , S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
Anyone making use of Flash MX for web application interfaces?
Yes, the new macromedia.com site will use Flash extensively for the
interface. It will be an enterprise-class Rich Internet Application, built
with Flash MX, Flash
% of women - and a lot of our senior management
positions are held by women. I've had three women bosses since I joined
Macromedia. It's a case of the right person for the job.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret
it has over a regular browser interface is good looking
interface and animation.
Then it really wasn't a good use of Flash.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 07:07 , Jeff D. Chastain wrote:
I did not study it for details, but what I read of the coding standards
link
you mentioned sounds like primarily just good programming practices - i.e.
naming conventions etc.
Correct, it is a list of recommended best
On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 11:00 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey there, after upgrading our first server to ColdFusion Server, one of
our pages crashed saying something to the effect of invalid include, fix
for case (can't remember the exact error message). After changing the
include
technology vendors,
to establish a baseline for supporting WindowsEyes and similar screen
reading browsers.
Some accessibility issues are highlighted in the document referenced from
our coding guidelines:
http://www.corfield.org/coldfusion/accessibility.html
Sean A Corfield -- http
On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 12:10 , Bonnie E. Betts wrote:
I'm trying to search for some details on using CFCONTENT. Where's the
knowledgebase!??? I went to support, CF, checked out Documentation and
it's all a bunch of pdf files! Is THAT what replaced knowledgebase???
Yikes! I
is slow. I'd recommend you used
arrays instead!
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up
cfscript identifies script code that is executed by CF on the server;
script identifies script code that is executed by the browser on the
client; they *look* similar but that are radically different things!
On Wednesday, August 28, 2002, at 12:17 , Kris Pilles wrote:
I am having some
On Wednesday, August 28, 2002, at 11:54 , Steve Foster wrote:
Dick - have you ported Flash Com to OSX? Could you use your same
methodology to port Flash Com as you used for CFMX
FlashCom is a native application (C++ compiled to binary). CFMX is a
(mostly) Java application and therefore
instead of just
codes...
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book
On Wednesday, August 28, 2002, at 10:56 , Tony Weeg wrote:
developer has these as his/her strong suit:
50/50 on graphical interface/programming work
Definitely wouldn't agree. UI work has nothing to do with software
developer in my experience... Now, if you're talking web developer
rather
care for, because
imho
it encourages a gratuitous continued antagonism between the old-school
and
the new, but I've heard it used.
I agree with you Isaac (and was a little surprised to hear MD say he'd
heard this distinction too - glad he also doesn't like it!).
Sean A Corfield -- http
.
Aw, but this is such *fun*...
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com
On Wednesday, August 28, 2002, at 12:22 , Ben Johnson wrote:
I always thought programmer sounded so 80's. Developer is just the
hip, new term. I believe the cool name now is Information Architect.
It's certainly a cool job title but here at Macromedia it has a very
specific meaning: someone
believe, which
replaced the dreadful IWENG-16 16-bit browser). But AOL will change to use
NS in due course - which will definitely shift the statistics away from IE.
.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
objects as needed. Then your page instantiates the CFC
and uses it throughout the page.
Note that I prefer the syntax of createObject() over cfobject but you
could use either.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
I've been thinking about this one for a week now - doing a compare
contrast against how we use cflogin here...
On Saturday, August 17, 2002, at 03:56 , Matthew Walker wrote:
When we display menus, only the
menu items associated with fuseactions permitted for that user's user
group
appear.
systems as well as Java integration - so the price of using
using CF is low from an integration p.o.v.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
compared those to CF
for our new intranet and chose CF.
Admittedly, the fact that we *make* CF was also a factor... :) That said,
CF - and the skills needed for it - is a much more cost-effective approach
for us.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody
On Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 11:57 , Paul Giesenhagen wrote:
What all takes place at the different CFUGs? Never have been to one
We can't tell people who don't attend... it's a secret! :)
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
community comes up with?
snipped for brevity's sake
Gm
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
This list and all House of Fusion resources
On Monday, August 26, 2002, at 08:39 , Scott Mulholland wrote:
Any recommendations of a Fuesbox book? The reviews at Amazon for
Discovering Fusebox 3 and for Fusebox: Developing Cold Fusion Apps
are about the same. Anyone here read them both??
I can't speak to DFB3, but I discuss FB:DCFA
says, we're currently rewriting the entire site on the MX
platform.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
Structure your ColdFusion code
the
CFMX update program will be available soon.
There's a note in the bugbase that indicates you might work around it by
setting your application name in cfapplication to UPPERCASE.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive
On Saturday, August 24, 2002, at 06:41 , Michael Dinowitz wrote:
Actually, I avoided all of the CS classes because I knew that the future
(as I saw it) would be different. I was right, but later went back to
learn the material and apply it to what I knew.
I guess it depends what you learn
On Thursday, August 22, 2002, at 01:11 , Ben Koshy wrote:
Performance issues? Design Issues? What's defines a large project?
Complexity and design, mainly.
Perhaps you could cite an example of a large project not built with
FuseBox and speculate as to why it could not be done with FuseBox?
On Thursday, August 22, 2002, at 07:27 , Dan G. Switzer, II wrote:
Out of curiosity, which syntax are you using:
#currentRow#
or
#queryName.currentRow#
I know that #queryName.currentRow# works.
The latter. I wouldn't have expected the former to work - does it work in
pre-MX releases?
As Robi (and New Riders) already know, I was very disappointed with this
book as it glosses over a lot of the new functionality in MX (the chapter
on the admin is a particular example of this complaint).
I understand there will be a 2nd edition that will provide more depth? I'm
also led to
On Thursday, August 22, 2002, at 07:51 , Kathy Wargo wrote:
My web host recently(Friday) upgraded to Cold Fusion MX6.
I have had extremely bad experiences with the upgrade.
The first two problems you list have been widely discussed and documented
- it sounds like your web host didn't do
)/
...
cfset cfc.method()/
...
cfset cfc.method()/
This may not be clear enouph so if you have any questions just ask.
If the above does not answer you question, you'll need to post more
details and maybe some code fragments.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're
On Wednesday, August 21, 2002, at 06:31 , Jesse Houwing wrote:
If you don't need Verity, then you can install the linux version. The
verity part won't work because it was written specifically for Linux and
is no JAVA or MAC OSX compatible executable.
That's what you need Virtual PC for - see
machine is always set to 1.
Post your code. I was experimenting with this yesterday and it works just
fine here.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
libraries and other Java components directly in CF. You gain
because of CF's RAD power.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
Your ad could
two more times because
(paraphrasing) This version is not compatible with Windows XP - you
must upgrade immediately!!
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
On Wednesday, August 21, 2002, at 11:13 , Benoit Hediard wrote:
Frameworks are usually build on top of design patterns.
Not really. Most frameworks don't really build on any design patterns at
all (and that's a contributing factor to why most frameworks suck!). For
more comments on what makes
(Sheesh, I spend the morning in a two-hour vendor presentation and there's
nearly 200 emails on CF-Talk!)
On Wednesday, August 21, 2002, at 03:17 , Benoit Hediard wrote:
I am very curious to see how Fusebox is going to evolve with CFCs.
aolMe too!/aol
Because, right now, I am not convinced
On Wednesday, August 21, 2002, at 07:03 , Hal Helms wrote:
I'm not arguing whether you're right or wrong, but question the basis of
the claim that Fusebox doesn't scale.
Having read the Peters/Papovich book, I ventured the opinion publicly that
FB would not scale to enterprise-class projects
On Tuesday, August 20, 2002, at 10:47 , Les Mizzell wrote:
Any issues I should be aware of, or changes between CF4.5/5 to MX that I
need to be aware of in relation to Fusebox?
I don't know if anyone has addressed performance issues with the Fusebox
architecture on CFMX but here are some of my
On Tuesday, August 20, 2002, at 12:30 , Hal Helms wrote:
Sean, I'm working on a from-the-ground-up rewrite of Fusebox based
around CFCs.
Sweet! I look forward to it!
I appreciate your thoughts on FB. Once inside a community,
it's sometimes hard to see things without that lens and
and current Fusebox
apps would work just fine with Hal's CFC implementation.
But the *real* benefits will come from Fusebox 4(?) which fully embraces
CFCs for user code...
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
applications in
production on Solaris (and have been since early in the beta program) -
Pet Market is deployed on CFMX for Solaris, for example.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
- what is the
actual bug about?)
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http
On Monday, August 19, 2002, at 07:04 , Stephen Collins wrote:
Between projects, I have been tasked with preparing a paper for our
staff and clients that details pros and cons of CFMX. We'd like to give
our clients a paper that contains as little spin as possible, with as
much reader-friendly
On Sunday, August 18, 2002, at 03:23 , Brook Davies wrote:
I have a cf page which calls 4 different cfcomponents using cfinvoke in
sequential order. Would it be faster to use the inherit property so only
1
cfinvoke command was issued and the one component called the others
methods? Is this
not process the files.
You need to modify both IIS and CFMX configurations. You've already
modified IIS I gather. Now you need to add the file extension mappings to
CFMX. I posted some notes about this on my blog a while back:
http://www.corfield.org/blog/2002_07_01_archive.html#78808603
Sean
On Wednesday, August 7, 2002, at 04:43 , Brook Davies wrote:
If I have a page which calls several distinct CFC's one after another, is
there a speed increase if I create a container CFC and use the
inheritance function to inherit the functionality from the other CFC's?
You can only inherit
I noticed something odd in the test code below...
On Friday, August 16, 2002, at 07:38 , Sean A Corfield wrote:
On Friday, August 16, 2002, at 12:25 , Douglas Brown wrote:
cfset myString =
...
cfset myString = 1
So the test of 'eq' is against an empty string but the test of 'len
was merely taking at face value the 'best practice' everyone bandies
around here of replacing X EQ with LEN(TRIM(X)). I don't agree it's
best practice.
The end result is that in CFMX, the old saw that LEN(X) was the fastest
way to do this is no longer true.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org
On Sunday, August 18, 2002, at 08:25 , Paul Giesenhagen wrote:
We are talking about CFMX right? Not CF5, in CF5, cfif Len(trim(str))
is
faster empty or not ...right?
The original post in this thread showed that was about twice as fast as
sstr eq (and was talking about CF5 or earlier).
If
I would've thought but apparently that's not the case - which
is why this whole thread has dragged on! :)
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
On Sunday, August 18, 2002, at 09:38 , Charlie Griefer wrote:
this is the kind of thing that really makes me want to consider an
exciting
career in the field of house-painting.
You mean, rather than recommending len(trim(x)) over x eq ? :) :) :)
As always with these sorts of questions,
Services to our methods.
Perhaps if you could be a little more specific about your application, we
can work together to design some infrastructure that will provide a good
mix of cflogin with custom group management?
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody
to use 'isDefined()'.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
FAQ: http
On Saturday, August 17, 2002, at 04:36 , Brian Thornton wrote:
Anyone on today?
Of course :)
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
You need to show us your code so we can figure out what's wrong...
On Saturday, August 17, 2002, at 07:09 , Mitko Gerensky-Greene wrote:
I am trying to use DW MX to create a small CF application. I am working
with a SQL Server database where I created a login called bmadmin to
administer
On Saturday, August 17, 2002, at 08:34 , Tony Weeg wrote:
cfset getTheRest=#Len(#Memo#)# - 255
cfoutput
and now, The Rest of The Story (shout out to my man Paul
Hizzarvey)
#Right('#Memo#',#getTheRest#)#
/cfoutput
That's a lot of #! Why not just:
cfset getTheRest =
to Execution Time 1856 milliseconds
Execution Time 1928 milliseconds
Compared to Execution Time 1847 milliseconds
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
of optimization is to only optimize when you know you have a
problem and have isolated what that problem is!
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
= arrayNew(1)/
/cfif
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place
On Friday, August 16, 2002, at 07:57 , Hal Helms wrote:
Reminds me of those great lines of M.A. Jackson:
Rules of Optimization:
Rule 1: Don't do it.
Rule 2 (for experts only): Don't do it yet.
Thanx for that - I was struggling to remember the actual quote (and the
attribution) but it
On Friday, August 16, 2002, at 04:35 , Gyrus wrote:
- Once you've authorised the user's login details, set their session
variables.
Don't forget the wonderful new CFMX authentication framework:
cflogin
cfloginuser
cflogout
getAuthUser()
- Call a tag from
independently.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news
On Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 04:22 , Matthew Walker wrote:
In this particular case I didn't think the thread had changed. I thought
I was talking about whether the concept of using Compare() negated the
existence of the issue regarding 33d. I was just woken up and was eating
breakfast at
sounds like what you need then?
Or do you need the server to allow more than one external IP address to
connect to it?
Note: Developer Edition is what you get in Studio MX and also what the
Trial Download version turns into after 30 days (it is Enterprise for the
first 30 days).
Sean A Corfield
think you need to tell us which product you're talking about...
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood
__
This list and all House of Fusion
On Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 11:42 , Matthew Walker wrote:
Interesting. I would do this for readability, not speed. To take a
common example I would see
cfif myQuery.RecordCount
as more readable and immediately understandable than
cfif myQuery.RecordCount gt 0
Ugh! :) I'd always
1001 - 1100 of 1199 matches
Mail list logo
