, application, or server scopes from within your
components. Instead, pass those values into a method via an argument.
-Original Message-
From: Rick Faircloth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 10:11 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification Required Concerning CFC
Sounds good, Jason.
Thanks for the overview and examples!
This is making more and more sense each hour!
Rick
-Original Message-
From: Jason Durham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:55 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification Required Concerning CFC
I see what you're saying.
I guess I just haven't had to use the various scopes in a way
that brought the variables scope that much in focus...
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 11:27 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification
What! Adobe must submit or I'll... I'll... oh, forget it.
-Original Message-
From: Will Tomlinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2008 12:32 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification Required Concerning CFC...
It just seems to make little sense to have two
]
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 10:27 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification Required Concerning CFC...
It just seems to make little sense to have two scopes named the same
thing which have nothing to do with each other.
This is true for any two separate CF programs. Each CF program has its
Rick - in the CFC function, variables.DSN refers to the variables scope
within the CFC only. So, you are setting the variables.DSN value, in the
instance of the object you're creating, to the value that is passed in as an
argument, arguments.DSN.
The variables scope within a CFC is local to
-Original Message-
From: Josh Nathanson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 1:14 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification Required Concerning CFC...
Rick - in the CFC function, variables.DSN refers to the variables scope
within the CFC only. So, you are setting
However, I *do* wish they had come up with a different name
for the scope exclusive to CFC's! Maybe something
varcomponent or something. Anything besides the name of a
scope already in use elsewhere!
That would make less sense. The Variables scope is the local scope for any
CF program.
... instantly recognizable.
That's just the way it seems as I get started with cfc's...
Rick
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 10:13 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification Required Concerning CFC...
However, I *do* wish
.
That's just the way it seems as I get started with cfc's...
Rick
-Original Message-
From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 10:13 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification Required Concerning CFC...
However, I *do* wish they had come up
It just seems to make little sense to have two scopes named
the same thing which have nothing to do with each other.
This is true for any two separate CF programs. Each CF program has its own
local scope. The same is true for CFML custom tags.
I could have variables.time in a cfc that is
It just seems to make little sense to have two scopes named the same thing
which have nothing to do with each other. It would be like me creating
two variables with the same name, but having different values. Now that would
be confusing!
Would you just go with the flow? I doubt Adobe is gonna
Why not upgrade to CF8 and use the RichText editor there?
-Original Message-
From: Rick Faircloth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 12:06 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Clarification about FCKEditor Use on websites...
Would it be correct to say that I have to buy the
Not at all Rick. Unless you plan to do major modifications to the
source and wish to keep those modifications to yourself, you can use
the free version.
Since you're running on CF8 now, you could just use cftextarea
richtext=true rather than mess with a separate installation.
HTH,
Jon
On
:29 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification about FCKEditor Use on websites...
Not at all Rick. Unless you plan to do major modifications to the
source and wish to keep those modifications to yourself, you can use
the free version.
Since you're running on CF8 now, you could just
Just a note on that point - the CF8 RichText version has
images, files and spell checking disabled.
I think you may be able to enable some or all of those features yourself, by
editing one of the FCK configuration files in /CFIDE/scripts/ajax/fckeditor.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification about FCKEditor Use on websites...
Not at all Rick. Unless you plan to do major modifications to the
source and wish to keep those modifications to yourself, you can use
the free version.
Since you're running on CF8 now, you could just use cftextarea
(*nods*) this is true and I looked into that as an option, however in
the end it became extremely clear that it was less time (and therefore
money) to install TinyMCE and a third-party image manager than modify
the richtext implementation.
Obviously I'd love to be able to go back and change it
Just a point of clarification Jon, if you use the FCKEditor under the LGPL
license you can freely modify the code to your hearts content. Its only if you
wish to distribute the source code that you need to make your modifications
public.
Ah, good point, Michael. Thanks for the clarification.
Jon
On Dec 11, 2007, at 1:45 PM, Michael MacDonald wrote:
Just a point of clarification Jon, if you use the FCKEditor under
the LGPL license you can freely modify the code to your hearts
content. Its only if you wish to distribute
me in genenral.
:-D
Mike
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 11:02 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: clarification
On Saturday, Aug 9, 2003, at 17:59 US/Pacific, Michael T. Tangorre
wrote:
Oh crap.. I see it!
The answer's
Brian Simmons at CentraSoft.com is always quick to respond if you have
any concerns about their questions.
-j
-Original Message-
From: Michael T. Tangorre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 8:46 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: clarification
Does anyone know what this
Oh crap.. I see it!
Yes = 1
True = 1
5 * 1 + 1 - 1
5 * 2 - 1
5 * 1 = 5
:-)
-Original Message-
From: Michael T. Tangorre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 8:46 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: clarification
Does anyone know what this will output and why?
#5 * True
My inclination would be for an error
But, could it be 5?
- Calvin
- Original Message -
From: Michael T. Tangorre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 8:45 PM
Subject: clarification
Does anyone know what this will output and why?
#5 *
On Saturday, Aug 9, 2003, at 17:59 US/Pacific, Michael T. Tangorre
wrote:
Oh crap.. I see it!
The answer's right but your logic is a little strange:
5 * 1 + 1 - 1
Since * is highest precedence than + or - this is equivalent to:
( 5 * 1 ) + 1 - 1
which is:
5 + 1 - 1
(which is 5)
Sean A
On Wednesday 09 Jul 2003 23:08 pm, raedwards wrote:
I'm looking at proposing a subscription to Devnet Professional. If i were
to subscribe now, i assume i would be sent DRK3. Would i also get 2 and 1
for my investment? I'd get Studio MX, development servers and alot of
other tools, but
Sean you ARE da man! Thanks dude.
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 1:09 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
On Tuesday, Feb 4, 2003, at 15:21 US/Pacific, Stacy Young wrote
-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
Sean you ARE da man! Thanks dude.
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 1:09 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
).
Matt Liotta
President CEO
Montara Software, Inc.
http://www.montarasoftware.com/
888-408-0900 x901
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 5:08 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
On Wednesday, Feb 5, 2003, at 09:48 US/Pacific, Matt Liotta wrote:
Sean, there appears to be different versions of the flashgateway
bundled
with different distributions. CFMX Enterprise has a flashgateway that
seems to be different from the one that comes with CFMX for J2EE (Phase
1), and
Is phase II out yet?
-Stace
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 6:11 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
On Wednesday, Feb 5, 2003, at 09:48 US/Pacific, Matt Liotta wrote:
Sean
Yes.
On Wednesday, Feb 5, 2003, at 16:55 US/Pacific, Stacy Young wrote:
Is phase II out yet?
-Stace
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 6:11 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
-ended by Flash.
Matt Liotta
President CEO
Montara Software, Inc.
http://www.montarasoftware.com/
888-408-0900 x901
-Original Message-
From: Simon Horwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 2:55 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w
-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
I don't really think it is a correct assumption that a single Flash
movie wouldn't want to call both CF and Java based services. There are
plenty of reasons why someone would mix CFML and Java on the backend and
if Macromedia is right about
Ok, sorry I misunderstood.
Matt Liotta
President CEO
Montara Software, Inc.
http://www.montarasoftware.com/
888-408-0900 x901
-Original Message-
From: Simon Horwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 3:17 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification - CFMX
Subject: RE: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
Passing WSDL URLs I think is a horrible idea. The overhead alone of
using a web service to proxy another web service on the same machine
just doesn't make sense.
Dave Gruber suggest using the Flash gateway that comes standard
On Monday, Feb 3, 2003, at 23:39 US/Pacific, Sean A Corfield wrote:
On Monday, Feb 3, 2003, at 23:18 US/Pacific, Matt Liotta wrote:
You cannot have the CF Flash gateway and the Java Flash gateway
deployed in the same context.
Actually you can. But I don't believe it is documented (and may not
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 5:08 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
On Monday, Feb 3, 2003, at 23:39 US/Pacific, Sean A Corfield wrote:
On Monday, Feb 3, 2003, at 23:18 US/Pacific, Matt Liotta wrote:
You cannot have the CF Flash
It will not enable the EJB or Servlet Adapters.
So if we're not hitting EJB's directly we'd be ok? (we'd be using client
classes)
-Stace
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 5:08 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Clarification
On Tuesday, Feb 4, 2003, at 15:13 US/Pacific, Stacy Young wrote:
I'm curious, what's the difference, in respect to security, between
accessing Java objects thru the gateway in this scenario as opposed to
using the Remoting for Java gateway?
The default security policy for JRun's Flash gateway
On Tuesday, Feb 4, 2003, at 15:21 US/Pacific, Stacy Young wrote:
It will not enable the EJB or Servlet Adapters.
So if we're not hitting EJB's directly we'd be ok? (we'd be using
client
classes)
Correct: you can call Java Beans and plain ol' Java classes and they
can, in turn, act as
I was under the impression that ColdFusion MX on every platform, supports
Flash Remoting. If this is the case, you will have all the gateway you need
just by having CFMX running on the server. Somebody correct me if I'm
misinformed about the CFMX for J2EE Flash Remoting out-of-the-box
Would it be accurate to say that in order to use Flash
Remoting for both CFMX and Java applications on the
same WebLogic server we'd need CFMX for J2EE and Flash
Remoting for Java?
Yes, that's my understanding - if you want to use Flash Remoting within your
non-CFMX Java applications, I
The CFMX Feature guide says its available for all editions..
http://www.macromedia.com/software/coldfusion/whitepapers/pdf/ColdFusionMXFe
atureGrid_03.pdf
Joe
-Original Message-
From: Stacy Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 12:39 AM
To: CF-Talk
You cannot have the CF Flash gateway and the Java Flash gateway deployed
in the same context. For many, this effectively means that you can't
call both CF and Java code from Flash unless you proxy the Java calls
through CF.
I have raised this issue many times with Macromedia and they still won't
16th St NW, # 220
Washington DC 20036
202.797.6570 (direct line)
http://www.figleaf.com
-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 04 February, 2003 2:19 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
You cannot have the CF
-
From: Simon Horwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 2:30 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
technically, there is an xml entry (forgive me, I canno remember where
it
is
right now) that allows you to modify the port used by the Flash
On Monday, Feb 3, 2003, at 23:18 US/Pacific, Matt Liotta wrote:
You cannot have the CF Flash gateway and the Java Flash gateway
deployed
in the same context.
Actually you can. But I don't believe it is documented (and may not be
within the terms of the license). However, assuming it doesn't
Software
1400 16th St NW, # 220
Washington DC 20036
202.797.6570 (direct line)
http://www.figleaf.com
-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 04 February, 2003 2:38 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification - CFMX for J2EE w/ Remoting
Passing
Actually you can. But I don't believe it is documented (and may not be
within the terms of the license). However, assuming it doesn't violate
the license agreement to do whatever is needed to enable this, I'll
find out from the product team how you do it and report back.
See another one of
Is this list alive?
__
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Yes Jim, we're alive. Are you? =)
At 07:36 PM 7/11/2002 -0400, you wrote:
Is this list alive?
Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.web-rat.com/
Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion
http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/
Moderator @ FlashCFM.com -
Barely... I just have not received anything since 7/2!
At 07:54 PM 7/11/2002 -0400, you wrote:
Yes Jim, we're alive. Are you? =)
At 07:36 PM 7/11/2002 -0400, you wrote:
Is this list alive?
Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.web-rat.com/
Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion
Same thing I got.
At 12:43 AM 7/3/2002 -0400, you wrote:
still wondering if the xml flavored packets are being
returned correctly?
I got an error message, referencing the nonexistent AQUAKESPACKAGE
argument I think. That's not reflected in the WSDL. Here's the invocation
code I used:
I got an error message, referencing the nonexistent AQUAKESPACKAGE
argument I think. That's not reflected in the WSDL.
its not part of the wsdl, ie not an arguement.
cfinvokeargument name=flavor value=chocolate
yes that should just bust. flavor should be either xml or wddx. though
lol... Dave did what I did... I picked a flavor. =)
Anyway...
http://webservices.tei.or.th/getQuakeData.cfc?wsdlmethod=fetchquakedataweeks=2flavor=xml
This returns XML ... slowly tho and I think there's something wrong with
the packet header or something - Even IE doesn't recognize it as a
I think it's the cfreturn #toString()# that's destroying it. That
should be done by the person that's invoking the webservice if they want to
see what the packet looks like.
At 06:51 AM 7/3/2002 -0400, you wrote:
lol... Dave did what I did... I picked a flavor. =)
Anyway...
cfinvokeargument name=flavor value=chocolate
yes that should just bust. flavor should be either xml or
wddx. though maybe i'm worrying too much? maybe just dump
back the query?
OK. When I tried it with flavor being xml, it worked just fine. The
browser doesn't display it as an XML
That's pretty cool... I figured the toString() was hosing things up. Oh
well.
~Todd
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Dave Watts wrote:
cfinvokeargument name=flavor value=chocolate
yes that should just bust. flavor should be either xml or
wddx. though maybe i'm worrying too much? maybe just
Todd,
It really depends. Because of varying implementation w/the SOAP protocol
between vendors, there are often issues when trying to share complex
data structures (queries, structures, etc) between platforms. Because of
this, using an XML packet passed as a string is usually the easiest way
Interesting. Funny that the person that emailed me basically smacked my
hand and said passing the XML as a string is a no no because then the xml
has to be parsed twice (which, ... in my example, I didn't have to parse
anything twice).
So... I'm confused who to listen to, of course.
~Todd
Subject: RE: Clarification needed -- WebServices (Part II)
Interesting. Funny that the person that emailed me basically smacked my
hand and said passing the XML as a string is a no no because then the xml
has to be parsed twice (which, ... in my example, I didn't have to parse
anything twice).
So
]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 9:04 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Clarification needed -- WebServices (Part II)
Interesting. Funny that the person that emailed me basically smacked
my
hand and said passing the XML as a string is a no no because then the
xml
has to be parsed twice (which
Is this the correct assumption? Would she even bother to make it a
webservice at this point? Or, should she really be returning a structure
/ array / query, etc..?
well i can return a wddx packet fine but apparently either i'm blowing away
my xml creation or maybe there's something to this
Paul, when you browse that CFC (like:
http://yourserver/somedirectory/this.cfc?WSDLmethod=someMethod) in
Internet explorer. What happens? Where's your webservice at? Can we peek?
~Todd
===
· From: Paul Hastings
· Subject: Re: Clarification needed -- WebServices
what happens? well all that xml makes me cranky...so i generally whack the
monitor a few times to make it go
awayhttp://webservices.tei.or.th/getQuakeData.cfc?wsdl
there's a discussion in the CF Component Development forums
Paul, when you browse that CFC (like:
What's the actual method that's returning the XML and do I need to pass in
something to satisfy the component?
At 05:34 AM 7/3/2002 +0700, you wrote:
what happens? well all that xml makes me cranky...so i generally whack the
monitor a few times to make it go
what happens? well all that xml makes me cranky...so i
generally whack the monitor a few times to make it go
awayhttp://webservices.tei.or.th/getQuakeData.cfc?wsdl
What's the actual method that's returning the XML and do I
need to pass in something to satisfy the component?
You
You can tell that information from reading the WSDL file; if I'm not
mistaken, the method name is fetchquakedata and it expects two
arguments:
weeks, which is a double-precision number, and flavor, which is a
string.
still wondering if the xml flavored packets are being returned correctly?
still wondering if the xml flavored packets are being
returned correctly?
I got an error message, referencing the nonexistent AQUAKESPACKAGE
argument I think. That's not reflected in the WSDL. Here's the invocation
code I used:
cfinvoke
I believe you can. Hopefully supported under the new version of Verity under
CF 5.0. Check out www.verity.com for more info on the Verity SDK.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Parker,
Kevin
Sent: Thursday, 10 May, 2001 1:50 PM
To: CF-Talk
71 matches
Mail list logo
