On 7/20/06, dcooper @ macromedia. com dcooper @ macromedia. com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FYI, just doing some testing on these tags (cfthread and cfjoin) and I hope
to have them posted on my blog today or tomorow. They'l require CF7, but
Standard Edition is fine (Enterprise not required).
On Thursday 20 July 2006 18:47, Dante Orlando wrote:
So out of curiosity, why didn't MACR implement cfthread/cfjoin instead of
the async gateway in the first place?
It's apples and oranges isn't it ?
Thread support is something you can do with the gateway, but the gateway also
offers you a lot
CFTHREAD CFJOIN proof of concept tags for CF7 posted:
http://www.dcooper.org/blog/client/index.cfm
Damon
FYI, just doing some testing on these tags (cfthread and cfjoin) and I
hope to have them posted on my blog today or tomorow. They'l require
CF7, but Standard Edition is fine
FYI, just doing some testing on these tags (cfthread and cfjoin) and I hope to
have them posted on my blog today or tomorow. They'l require CF7, but Standard
Edition is fine (Enterprise not required).
Using the these tags with CF7 won't give you the thread pooling and other
fine-grained
On 7/18/06, dcooper @ macromedia. com dcooper @ macromedia. com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, we did cfthread tag in about a day...we're debating whether to toss
it out there as an open source project...
So out of curiosity, why didn't MACR implement cfthread/cfjoin instead of
the async
FYI, just doing some testing on these tags (cfthread and cfjoin) and I hope
to have them posted on my blog today or tomorow. They'l require CF7, but
Standard Edition is fine (Enterprise not required).
Just out of curiosity, what is cfjoin?
-Dan
The NewAtlanta folks are adding CFTHREAD/CFJOIN to BD7. It allows you
to fire off an asynch request and then get it back.
Looks like Damon and the CF folks are going to give us this as an
unsupported(?) addon.
Andy
On 20/07/06, Dan G. Switzer, II [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FYI, just doing some
Andy,
The NewAtlanta folks are adding CFTHREAD/CFJOIN to BD7. It allows you
to fire off an asynch request and then get it back.
Looks like Damon and the CF folks are going to give us this as an
unsupported(?) addon.
Thanks for the response, that clears it up!
_Dan
Some would disagree ;-) heh
..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.
Bobby Hartsfield
http://acoderslife.com
-Original Message-
From: Rick Root [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 12:53 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Low-tech asychronous call to ColdFusion
Bobby Hartsfield
PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Sent: Tue Jul 18 05:41:26 2006
Subject: Re: Low-tech asychronous call to ColdFusion
In about 2 days I've got a really light weight Asyncronous HTTP caller
lib coming out.
It allows you to make asyncronous GET and POST requests to any given URL.
I haven't
I am aware (somewhat!) of the asynchronous Web services capability with CFCs
in ColdFusion. What would listers recommend if I simply want to call a
ColdFusion action page asynchronously. The asychronous call is a one-way trip
and does not require data back to the caller.
The really simple
On Monday 17 July 2006 17:10, Rick Root wrote:
That wouldn't be asynchronous though. Because his page would wait for
the CFHTTP to complete.
Not if you set a low timeout value :-)
--
Tom Chiverton
This email is sent for and on behalf of
asychronous call to ColdFusion
Tom Chiverton wrote:
On Monday 17 July 2006 16:07, Paul Fraser wrote:
I would prefer to not go the CFC route, but I am open to persuasion.
The poor mans version could fire off a CFHTTP request to a page to do the
heavy lifting, and then print the 'all OK' message
Yeah, we did cfthread tag in about a day...we're debating whether to toss it
out there as an open source project...
Damon
Hmmm...sounds like a perfect use of the new CFTHREAD tag in BD 7.0:
http://blog.newatlanta.com/index.
cfm?mode=entryentry=152A1ECC-B7C2-5C0D-4269B203A722C055
Vince
]
To: CF-Talk cf-talk@houseoffusion.com
Sent: Tue Jul 18 17:23:22 2006
Subject: Re: Low-tech asychronous call to ColdFusion
Yeah, we did cfthread tag in about a day...we're debating whether to toss it
out there as an open source project...
Damon
Hmmm...sounds like a perfect use of the new
I should add:
1) This was built by one of our developers in his personal time, so it'd be
unsupported by us officially, etc, but we'll see if it makes sense to post on
something like the Adobe Exchange, etc, and/or roll into the product in a
future update.
2) Customers using CF7 Enterprise
So, would this still be an Enterprise only feature then? Or would the
tag be usable in Standard? (You do realise that if you say Ent only
then all hell will reign down upon you from others currently watching
this thread :)
Andy
On 18/07/06, dcooper @ macromedia. com dcooper @ macromedia. com
Bobby Hartsfield wrote:
If you were going to do that, couldn't you just use
fancyTitleAJAX/fancyTitle ?
Probably, but that wouldn't be low-tech ;)
~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting,
Not sure, TBD :) (don't need to stinkin hell raining down on me! :)
Let me just say that there's nothing (*technically*) that ties it to the
gateway infrastructure...
Damon
So, would this still be an Enterprise only feature then? Or would the
tag be usable in Standard? (You do realise that
Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote:
Don't debate - do.
I agree. I was pretty much drooling at the thought of CFTHREAD when
Vince talked about it at CFUNITED.
rick
~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages
You'll make lots of CF Std people happy and you'll probably gets lots
of beer out it too :)
That would be the clincher for me lol
On 18/07/06, dcooper @ macromedia. com dcooper @ macromedia. com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not sure, TBD :) (don't need to stinkin hell raining down on me! :)
Let
Cool--you guys are good! Then it should only take you another day to implement
abstract CFCs and CFC interfaces (both fully supported--not open source
projects--in BD 7.0). And adding support for the null keyword and IsNull
function (more BD 7.0 features) could probably be done before lunch;
Vince Bonfanti wrote:
Cool--you guys are good! Then it should only take you another day to
implement abstract CFCs and CFC interfaces (both fully supported--not open
source projects--in BD 7.0). And adding support for the null keyword and
IsNull function (more BD 7.0 features) could
Cool--you guys are good! Then it should only take you another
day to implement abstract CFCs and CFC interfaces (both fully
supported--not open source projects--in BD 7.0). And adding
support for the null keyword and IsNull function (more BD
7.0 features) could probably be done before
I just posted up my asyncHTTP caller (asyncronous GET and POST requests).
http://www.compoundtheory.com/?action=asynchttp.index
I've yet to do a blog post on it, but it's very straight forward.
Drop the lib in your webroot (or mapping), create a new asyncHTTP CFC,
and then run the get() or
First, my apologies for the snooty tone of my previous message (I somehow can't
seem to avoid shooting myself in the foot in public--it must be a personality
flaw).
To answer your question: no, BD 7.0 has not been released publicly yet. The
public beta is planned to begin soon, as announced at
First, my apologies for the snooty tone of my previous
message (I somehow can't seem to avoid shooting myself in the
foot in public--it must be a personality flaw).
Personally, I always attempt to consciously discount the tone of email
messages, since it's so easy to misinterpret that.
To
I am aware (somewhat!) of the asynchronous Web services capability with CFCs in
ColdFusion. What would listers recommend if I simply want to call a ColdFusion
action page asynchronously. The asychronous call is a one-way trip and does not
require data back to the caller.
Here's the scenario
On Monday 17 July 2006 16:07, Paul Fraser wrote:
I would prefer to not go the CFC route, but I am open to persuasion.
The poor mans version could fire off a CFHTTP request to a page to do the
heavy lifting, and then print the 'all OK' message.
--
Tom Chiverton
Tom Chiverton wrote:
On Monday 17 July 2006 16:07, Paul Fraser wrote:
I would prefer to not go the CFC route, but I am open to persuasion.
The poor mans version could fire off a CFHTTP request to a page to do the
heavy lifting, and then print the 'all OK' message.
That wouldn't be
That wouldn't be asynchronous though. Because his page would wait for
the CFHTTP to complete.
One alternative would be to call a cfm file in an iframe, and then use
javascript to redirect the main page.
The request in the inline from would continue to run even though the
browser isn't attached
I posted a different solution here:
http://www.numtopia.com/terry/blog/archives/2006/07/asynchronous_cfml_wi
thout_a_gateway.cfm
It does require using a cfc though.
Terrence Ryan
Senior Systems Programmer
Wharton Computing and Information Technology
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmmm...sounds like a perfect use of the new CFTHREAD tag in BD 7.0:
http://blog.newatlanta.com/index.cfm?mode=entryentry=152A1ECC-B7C2-5C0D-4269B203A722C055
Vince Bonfanti
New Atlanta Communications, LLC
I am aware (somewhat!) of the asynchronous Web services capability
with CFCs in
Can you just use AJAX and specify a dummy return function?
On 7/17/06, Paul Fraser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am aware (somewhat!) of the asynchronous Web services capability with CFCs
in ColdFusion. What would listers recommend if I simply want to call a
ColdFusion action page
In about 2 days I've got a really light weight Asyncronous HTTP caller
lib coming out.
It allows you to make asyncronous GET and POST requests to any given URL.
I haven't finished writing up the documentation for my website, but
contact me offlist if you want a copy, and I can walk you through
35 matches
Mail list logo
