eveloper with a lot more flexibility on a
wider range of project types.
- Original Message -
From: "Patricia G. L. Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: Called as module or include?
B Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com
-Original Message-
From: John Paul Ashenfelter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 6:43 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Called as module or include?
> So varied scopes are bad because they promote lax coding
alk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 9:39 PM
> Subject: Re: Called as module or include?
>
>
>> I hate trying to figure out whether an action is being caused
>> because
>> of a variable
>> that could have been paramed, created b
elter
CTO/TransitionPoint
- Original Message -
From: "Matt Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: Called as module or include?
> So varied scopes are bad because they promote lax coding
>> > unless of course you practice the ridiculous art of converting
>> > everything to the attributes scope - as per fusebox.
>
>What is so ridiculous about that?
>
>
>> > unless of course you practice the ridiculous art of converting
>> > everything to the attributes scope - as per
93
-Original Message-
From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:24 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Called as module or include?
> > unless of course you practice the ridiculous art of converting
> > everything to the attributes scope -
it also means you've created a tighter coupling between templates.
- Original Message -
From: "Patricia G. L. Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: Called as module or inclu
I hate trying to figure out whether an action is being caused because
of a variable
that could have been paramed, created by a query or sent in from a form
or a url. Especially when I have to pick up an existing FB app,
scoping everything in the attributes scope has usually made more work
for m
an Love" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 4:15 PM
>Subject: RE: Called as module or include?
>
>
>> For one, it adds definition to the code. It's easier to see what's
>> going
>o
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 4:15 PM
>Subject: RE: Called as module or include?
>
>
>> For one, it adds definition to the code. It's easier to see what's going
>on
>> when the F
From: "Bryan Love" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 4:15 PM
Subject: RE: Called as module or include?
> For one, it adds definition to the code. It's easier to see what's going
on
> when the
e-
From: John Paul Ashenfelter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:58 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Called as module or include?
- Original Message -
From: "Bryan Love" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursda
- Original Message -
From: "Bryan Love" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 3:45 PM
Subject: RE: Called as module or include?
> >Who is to say JSP does it right? Personally, I love having my URL/Form
-
From: Raymond Camden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:24 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Called as module or include?
> > unless of course you practice the ridiculous art of converting
> > everything to the attributes scope - as per fusebox.
>
> K
> > unless of course you practice the ridiculous art of converting
> > everything to the attributes scope - as per fusebox.
>
> Kinda like JSP does -- request.getAttributes(). What a crazy
> idea..
Who is to say JSP does it right? Personally, I love having my URL/Form
scopes split.
=
- Original Message -
From: "Bryan Love" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 2:49 PM
Subject: RE: Called as module or include?
> unless of course you practice the ridiculous art of converting
> e
-- now they are only used when the
developer needs them, so any objections you'd had to the FORM/URL to
ATTRIBUTES copying is moot.
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Love [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 2:49 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Called as module or include
uble, let it be in my day, that my child may have
peace'..."
- Thomas Paine, The American Crisis
"Let's Roll"
- Todd Beamer, Flight 93
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 11:39 AM
To: CF-Talk
> Is there a possibility to get to know if a template
> is called either via cfmodule or cfinclude? I can
> see the difference between standalone and cfinclude
> /cfmodule by executing a check with GetBaseTemplatePath
> but no difference between the cfmodule and cfinclude
> methods.
I imagine
Flight 93
-Original Message-
From: Peter Mayer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 10:29 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Called as module or include?
Hello!
Is there a possibility to get to know if a template is called either via
cfmodule or cfinclude? I can see the differenc
Hello!
Is there a possibility to get to know if a template is called either via
cfmodule or cfinclude? I can see the difference between standalone and
cfinclude/cfmodule by executing a check with GetBaseTemplatePath but no
difference between the cfmodule and cfinclude methods.
Best regards,
P
21 matches
Mail list logo
