sorry, you're right! ... too quick!
-Original Message-
From: Philip Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 3:26 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
> or outside the tag:
>
> cfif x=y
> isChecked = "checked"
> else
&g
doh
still in the transitional phase from ASP to ColdFusion
but you catch my drift
-Original Message-
From: Philip Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12 February 2004 14:26
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
> or outside the tag:
>
> cfif x=y
> isChecke
> or outside the tag:
>
> cfif x=y
> isChecked = "checked"
> else
> isChecked = "checked"
> /cfif
>
>
Only if you want it to always be checked
Oh, and to break since you can't do "cfif x=y" it'd have to be "cfif x
eq y"
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe
or outside the tag:
cfif x=y
isChecked = "checked"
else
isChecked = "checked"
/cfif
-Original Message-
From: Bill Grover [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 3:03 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
Interesting, thanks. I tho
> Interesting, thanks. I thought I had done that before and
> received an error about not being able to nest the CFIF tag
> inside another tag. But it is very possible I was using a
> CFINPUT instead of a regular INPUT. I was probably on v4.01
> at the time as well.
It's only CF tags that
> The one place I've found that I really like the IIF is to use
> it in areas like the following code sample:
>
>
>name="#REQUEST.cReorderFormArtPrefix##ReorderJob.ljob#"
>value="Yes"
>
> #IIF(laReorderJobs[lnLoop][REQUEST.cReorderFormArtPrefix] NEQ "",
> DE(
__
-Original Message-
From: David Ashworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 9:00 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
you wouldn't have to code it twice using CFIF
just have the CFIF around the checked parameter
checked>
-Original
you wouldn't have to code it twice using CFIF
just have the CFIF around the checked parameter
checked>
-Original Message-
From: Bill Grover [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12 February 2004 12:47
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
The one place I've found that
atthew Walker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 6:27 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
Really? I'm getting about 50 and 150ms respectively. So for me while iif()
is slower it's only one hundredth of a millisecond difference i.e. way below
anything I&#x
know.
TK
-Original Message-
From: Barney Boisvert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 7:43 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
I ran several tests to check the relative performance of the various
conditional things. In every case, the idea was to check
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 3:39 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Which is quicker
>
> Interesting that people's ideas of good programming style are
> so different.
> I think we generally consider good style to be the way we as
> individuals
> normally do it,
from,
therefore to me that's good style. I would also write
recordset.recordcount> and consider that elegant. Others find it appalling.
-Original Message-
From: Jim McAtee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 12 February 2004 11:34 a.m.
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Which is quicker
-
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 3:34 PM
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
> cfswitch is both quicker and more elegant. The only downside is that it
>
Sent: Thursday, 12 February 2004 11:11 a.m.
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
You may get these results due to use of de(), run this code, which I think
is more fair:
12
#temp-getTickCount()#
#iif(i mod 2, 1, 2)#
#temp-getTickCount()#
I got 15 - 16 as results for bo
Ooops, I forgot to say that my tests are all on MX6.1, of course on CF5
'iif' is painfully slow.
TK
-Original Message-
From: Philip Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 6:11 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
> I don'
Original Message-
From: Barney Boisvert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 6:00 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
Not always the case, because of it's dynamic evaluation capabilities. And
those same dynamic evaluation capabilities make it
Message-
From: Matthew Walker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 5:57 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
My test indicates iif() is about 400% slower. But the real issue is code
readability. If you think it's more readable in any or all circumst
> I don't know why people don't like iif (immediate if), it is
> as quick as cfif and takes only one line. For simple things,
> like "if x < y print true else print false", I think using
> iif makes code shorter without sacrificing clarity and speed.
>
> If you don't believe iif is fast then I
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> #iif(i mod 2, de("!"), de("?"))#
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, 12 February 2004 10:47 a.m.
> To: CF-
venson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 2:33 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: Which is quicker
>
> CFCASE will be a tad quicker
>
> Basically CFIF has to check ALL conditions where CFCASE will
> stop when it finds the correct case.
>
> Brya
47 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Which is quicker
>
> I don't know why people don't like iif (immediate if), it is
> as quick as
> cfif and takes only one line. For simple things, like "if x <
> y print true
> else print false", I think using iif
> -Original Message-
> From: Bryan Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 2:50 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: Which is quicker
>
> So Barney this has changed since CF 5 then??
>
> Bryan Stevenson B.Comm.
> VP & Dire
light.
Here's my sample:
!?
#iif(i mod 2, de("!"), de("?"))#
-Original Message-
From: Tom Kitta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 12 February 2004 10:47 a.m.
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
I don't know why people d
.com
-
Vancouver Island ColdFusion Users Group
Founder & Director
www.cfug-vancouverisland.com
- Original Message -
From: Barney Boisvert
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 2:44 PM
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
is fast then I encourage you to write a small test
and see for yourself.
TK
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Walker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 5:34 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Which is quicker
cfswitch is both quicker and more elegant.
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 2:33 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: Which is quicker
>
> CFCASE will be a tad quicker
>
> Basically CFIF has to check ALL conditions where CFCASE will
> stop when it finds the correct case.
>
> Bryan Stevenson
cfswitch is both quicker and more elegant. The only downside is that it
doesn't handle dynamic values.
Iii() is one of those functions, like evaluate(), usage of which is
generally discouraged.
-Original Message-
From: Parker, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 12 February
CFCASE will be a tad quicker
Basically CFIF has to check ALL conditions where CFCASE will stop when it finds the correct case.
Bryan Stevenson B.Comm.
VP & Director of E-Commerce Development
Electric Edge Systems Group Inc.
t. 250.920.8830
e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
cfcase / cfswitch is the desired method of choice, from what ive always
been told.
since the cfif have to all be evaluated for each request.
tony
r e v o l u t i o n w e b d e s i g n
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.revolutionwebdesign.com
its only looks good to those who can see bad as well
-anonym
29 matches
Mail list logo
