Re: Switching to CFMX

2002-10-01 Thread Sean A Corfield
On Tuesday, Oct 1, 2002, at 06:49 US/Pacific, Benjamin S. Rogers wrote: > This is the exact same argument that gets made against ColdFusion. Not by me. > I'm > sure those early Word Perfect assembly programmers said the same thing > about programmers writing word processing programs in languages

Re: Switching to CFMX

2002-10-01 Thread Sean A Corfield
On Monday, Sep 30, 2002, at 17:55 US/Pacific, Nat Papovich wrote: > Unfortunately though, Rob's really long index doesn't appear to use > Fusebox > 3's "core file", which I assume, is the "complex machinery" you > mention, > Sean. In pre-FB3, there is very little to no machinery used, so long >

RE: Switching to CFMX

2002-10-01 Thread Benjamin S. Rogers
> Secondly, this is exactly the sort of issue that > makes me very nervous of Fusebox. It tries hard > to hide complexity from programmers but this > shows just how much code it's really hiding and > just how much machinery lurks behind the > framework. This is the exact same argument that gets

RE: Switching to CFMX

2002-09-30 Thread Nat Papovich
TED]] > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 4:07 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Switching to CFMX > > > I've been trying to resist responding to this thread but... > > On Monday, Sep 30, 2002, at 14:44 US/Pacific, Rob Rohan wrote: > > > > > delimiters=&

RE: Fusebox and CFMX was RE: Switching to CFMX

2002-09-30 Thread Rob Rohan
conclusion, Fusebox = good Java 64k method limit = bad (JSP and Cocoon suffer from this as well) :) Rob -Original Message- From: Mike Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 4:53 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Fusebox and CFMX was RE: Switching to CFMX Sean, thanks for all

Fusebox and CFMX was RE: Switching to CFMX

2002-09-30 Thread Mike Brunt
ffice 562.243.6255 "Making the NET Work" -Original Message- From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 4:07 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Switching to CFMX I've been trying to resist responding to this thread but... On Monday, Sep 3

Re: Switching to CFMX

2002-09-30 Thread Sean A Corfield
I've been trying to resist responding to this thread but... On Monday, Sep 30, 2002, at 14:44 US/Pacific, Rob Rohan wrote: > >delimiters=","> > > > > > > ... > Let me say, first of all, that I'm glad you've found a workaround. S

RE: Switching to CFMX

2002-09-30 Thread Benjamin S. Rogers
ogers http://www.c4.net/ v.508.240.0051 f.508.240.0057 -Original Message- From: Rob Rohan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 5:45 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Switching to CFMX Thanks Benjamin, I appreciate your response, and I'll check out the xml file - tha

RE: Switching to CFMX

2002-09-30 Thread Rob Rohan
(a have to agree not my code) -Original Message- From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 3:32 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Switching to CFMX Good to know. That explains why I haven't run into it as I tend to nest fuses (I don't ac

RE: Switching to CFMX

2002-09-30 Thread Rob Rohan
r. This is often caused by an error in the exception handling subsystem. OR Code of a method longer than 65535 bytes Thanks again Rob -Original Message- From: Benjamin S. Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 2:12 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Switching to

RE: Switching to CFMX

2002-09-30 Thread Benjamin S. Rogers
> * Does cfinclude copy the contents of every included file > then compile - regardless of the switch statement? I believe includes still happen dynamically. You can verify this by deleting all the files in the following directory: \CFusionMX\wwwroot\WEB-INF\cfclasses Restart the ColdFusion