> Adobe, presumably, has developers who work on their site. The question
> isn't about taking away CF product developers, it is about what
> language to use to do that which is already being done...ie, building
> the Adobe website. There is no good reason, that I'm aware of, to not
> implement a g
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Dave Watts wrote:
>
> Yes, in the very real sense that there is a finite amount of
> resources. I'd much rather have Adobe hire more CF product developers
> and testers, etc, than pay developers to rewrite their site.
Adobe, presumably, has developers who work o
>>I'm pretty good at rationalizing though. =)
+1
One of the best. =)
G
!--
> Music is a moral law. It gives soul to the universe, wings to the
> mind, flight to the imagination, and charm and gaiety to life and to
> everything.
> Plat
>
>
~~
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Dave Watts wrote:
>
>>> Adobe is a big company, with a bunch of products. Adobe's web site
>>> predates the Macromedia merger. Should they rewrite their site with CF
>>> to make it more "prominent", or should they focus on building and
>>> selling their tools?
>>
>> Adobe is a big company, with a bunch of products. Adobe's web site
>> predates the Macromedia merger. Should they rewrite their site with CF
>> to make it more "prominent", or should they focus on building and
>> selling their tools?
>
> Are the two mutually exclusive? =)p
Yes, in the very re
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Dave Watts wrote:
...
> Adobe is a big company, with a bunch of products. Adobe's web site
> predates the Macromedia merger. Should they rewrite their site with CF
> to make it more "prominent", or should they focus on building and
> selling their tools?
Are the t
> I meant the prominence of the product itself on the adobe site, not the
> implementation of the technology.
Adobe is a big company, with a bunch of products. Adobe's web site
predates the Macromedia merger. Should they rewrite their site with CF
to make it more "prominent", or should they focus
Ah OK - gotcha well like it or not, things such as Creative Suite
directly affect Adobe's stock price so it always gets top billing.
And then of course there's Livecycle, which speaks for itself.
I wouldn't worry about CF not being on the Adobe.com homepage
On 17 November 2010 18:43, Michae
Some of it is a little dated...
http://blog.cutterscrossing.com/index.cfm/General-Coding-Guidelines
Steve "Cutter" Blades
Adobe Community Professional - ColdFusion
Adobe Certified Professional
Advanced Macromedia ColdFusion MX 7 Developer
Co-Author of "Learning Ext JS"
http://www.packtpub.com/l
I meant the prominence of the product itself on the adobe site, not the
implementation of the technology.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Andy Allan wrote:
>
> It's not that at all ... I believe Day is now powering all the ADC
> content etc (which makes perfect sense) and I know that the Part
--Original Message-
From: Michael Grant [mailto:mgr...@modus.bz]
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:54 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Where to put your code
>
> although a lot of what is adobe.com seems to be moving away from CF
>
I noticed this the other day. Seems like Adobe isn
It's not that at all ... I believe Day is now powering all the ADC
content etc (which makes perfect sense) and I know that the Partner
area is moving over to be driven by Salesforce. And there's other jsp
content mixed in there too.
It's really no difference from us using Trac (powered by Python)
>
> although a lot of what is adobe.com seems to be moving away from CF
>
I noticed this the other day. Seems like Adobe isn't all that proud of CF.
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldf
ber 15, 2010 7:44 PM
> To: cf-talk
> Subject: Re: Where to put your code
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Paul Alkema
> wrote:
>> Does anyone out there have any written coding standards or coding
>> documentation that they would be willing to share? I would be interes
-talk
Subject: Re: Where to put your code
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Paul Alkema
wrote:
> Does anyone out there have any written coding standards or coding
> documentation that they would be willing to share? I would be interested
in
> seeing what other development teams use as far
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Paul Alkema
wrote:
> Does anyone out there have any written coding standards or coding
> documentation that they would be willing to share? I would be interested in
> seeing what other development teams use as far as coding standards.
Here's what my team develope
Well, I've been using frameworks since Fusebox 2 came out, so I still
tend to follow generic CF framework conventions, if you can call them that.
* display a message, a menu, or data: dsp.user.cfm, and depending on
the framework, all displays probably go in a /views subfolder;
th
Thanks for your feedback. You make some good points.
Does anyone out there have any written coding standards or coding
documentation that they would be willing to share? I would be interested in
seeing what other development teams use as far as coding standards.
I agree that coding standards help. I am disagreeing with the ones you
are proposing and your use of the word "ideal." For example, I don't
think the main use case of a cfinclude is to break up large pages into
smaller chunks. I think custom tags can contain complex code. If all
application logic,
I think that when working on a team of programmers that are all working on
the same applications or the same website that it's important to have a
programming standard or a guide. I think this goes with any language be it
web or desktop applications. I think that it's ok for programmers to have
th
ly to everyone else on the planet, and many
people still continue to do so.
Russ
-Original Message-
From: Paul Alkema [mailto:paulalkemadesi...@gmail.com]
Sent: 13 November 2010 13:19
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Where to put your code
I second this. : )
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:05 PM,
Or any version of Perl...
--
WSS4CF - WS-Security framework for CF
http://wss4cf.riaforge.org/
On 14 November 2010 13:40, Gerald Guido wrote:
>
>>>When was the last time you wrote a web app with a flint axe?
>
> Right around PHP 3 or CF 2 :-)
>
> G!
>
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Jam
>>When was the last time you wrote a web app with a flint axe?
Right around PHP 3 or CF 2 :-)
G!
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 12:02 AM, James Holmes wrote:
>
> When was the last time you wrote a web app with a flint axe?
>
> --
> WSS4CF - WS-Security framework for CF
> http://wss4cf.riaforge.org/
When was the last time you wrote a web app with a flint axe?
--
WSS4CF - WS-Security framework for CF
http://wss4cf.riaforge.org/
On 14 November 2010 12:01, Gerald Guido wrote:
>
>>> I'd argue that CF didn't allow for well written applications before CFCs
> came along.
>
> Swapping out "well
>> I'd argue that CF didn't allow for well written applications before CFCs
came along.
Swapping out "well written applications" for "well made tools", I would
argue that there were no well made tools before the advent of fire, flint,
copper, bronze, iron, steel, interchangeable parts, computers
> I'd argue that CF didn't allow for well written applications before
> CFCs came along.
That's absurd on its face. There are no well-written applications in
any procedural languages, then? You need OO for a well-written
application? Operating systems are written in C - nothing well-written
in th
I second this. : )
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:05 PM, James Holmes wrote:
>
> I'd argue that CF didn't allow for well written applications before
> CFCs came along.
>
> --
> WSS4CF - WS-Security framework for CF
> http://wss4cf.riaforge.org/
>
>
>
> On 13 November 2010 02:16, Dave Watts wrote:
>
If people put utility functions in CFCs I definitely recommend caching
these in RAM. However, what I see many people do is instantiating a
large CFC that consists only of functions, calling one tiny function
inside of it, then destroying the CFC, with no caching used at all.
The majority of ColdFu
I'd argue that CF didn't allow for well written applications before
CFCs came along.
--
WSS4CF - WS-Security framework for CF
http://wss4cf.riaforge.org/
On 13 November 2010 02:16, Dave Watts wrote:
> Functions existed well before CFCs - does that mean that
> well-written applications predati
Why not create the CFC in the application scope to cache it in RAM?
--
WSS4CF - WS-Security framework for CF
http://wss4cf.riaforge.org/
On 13 November 2010 06:22, Mike Chabot wrote:
> I prefer using include files and caching common
> functions in RAM when the application loads.
~
In my option, putting functions and application logic in cfm files,
include files, and custom tags is fine. The vast majority of
ColdFusion Web sites allow developers to do this and I think adding
these restrictions could lead to a worse outcome. If you hire an
expert developer, and that expert de
the power of CF is in its simplicity.
A newbie can come along and just learn a handful of tags and functions to
develop a web site.
The next step up is CFC's, frameworks and OOP
Some people simply will not want or need to learn anything beyond the
handful of tags and functions if this is suffici
While I might prefer to do things the way you describe, I hesitate to
call these things "best practices".
> Hm, I respectfully disagree with putting functions in cfm pages entirely no
> matter how it's being pulled. I think there's a place for functions and
> that's in cfcs.
You do realize there
ctions and include them most likely your talking to
> that function using scoped variables which as other have mentioned is
> usually a bad practice to do using functions.
>
> Paul
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Gerald Guido [mailto:gerald.gu...@gmail.com]
> Se
-
From: Gerald Guido [mailto:gerald.gu...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 12:54 PM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Where to put your code
My only exceptions to these would be:
> Includes
>
> Should Not Contain: Application Logic. Processes or functions.
>
A lot of times (depending on the a
while you may not use MVC on every app, sticking to certain guidelines
like what code to put where, also known as includes vs custom tags vs
cfc, along with the use of external JS and CSS will make any app
development smoother..
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Russ Michaels wrote:
>
> You cann
My only exceptions to these would be:
> Includes
>
> Should Not Contain: Application Logic. Processes or functions.
>
A lot of times (depending on the app) I stick functions (UDFs) in an
include. I have a lot of utility functions that (arguably) don't really need
to be in a cfc.
Custom Tags
>
team environment in order to avoid coding inconsistencies on
large websites at least general guidelines are a must. :)
-Original Message-
From: Russ Michaels [mailto:r...@michaels.me.uk]
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 12:20 PM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Where to put your code
You cannot r
Here is my opinion:*
templates*
Contains:
object instances to render into HTML, conditionals for output, formatting
methods
Does Not Contain:
dynamically rendered CSS, dynamically rendered JavaScript, patterns,
methods.
also any business, data and file management logic that can be written in a
You cannot really apply such rules to everyone.
If someone just has a very simple mostly flat, then using mvc frameworks and
CFC's will probably be overkill and create 10 x more code is actually
required.
In those situations you are probably just going to use some cfm pages and
maybe a few cfinclu
I agree with those additions. Thanks!
-Original Message-
From: Scott Stewart [mailto:webmas...@sstwebworks.com]
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 10:46 AM
To: cf-talk
Subject: Re: Where to put your code
I'd only modify it a little:
Straight on CFM Page
Should Contain:
I'd only modify it a little:
Straight on CFM Page
Should Contain: UI or presentation code. HTML, JavaScript, simple
ColdFusion to implement UI/Presentation
(IE; does var.foo exist output etc..).
Should Not Contain: Application Logic. Processes or functions.
Includes
Should Contain: reusable u
Oh yeah. Of course ideally we would be on an MVC framework but we can't do
that due to internal reasons. This doc is for those not on an MVC. Don't
want any non MVC haters to yell at me. Haha.
Paul Alkema
~|
Order the Adobe
Hi All,
I recently had a discussion with some other programmers on my team dealing
with where to put application code and when. This is a small little guide I
wrote that I try to use and I wanted some second opinions on my coding
logic.
Thanks,
Paul
--
44 matches
Mail list logo