I should probably keep my nose out of this one. :)
> Ah... this is why competition is good.
> I don't have a new feature, per se, but I do have a pet
> peeve that came about from porting an app written in
> another language to an online CF version.
> The CFCASE portion of CFSWITCH is sorely lim
02 15:31
>> To: CF-Talk
>> Subject: RE: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
>> implemented?)
>>
>> The try isn't too expensive, but the catch can be. However, running a
>> bunch of trys within a loop can also degrade performance.
>>
>>> Sent: 15 October 2002 15:31
>>> To: CF-Talk
>>> Subject: RE: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
>>> implemented?)
>>>
>>> The try isn't too expensive, but the catch can be. However, running a
>>> bunch of trys with
No, the ZIPs aren't common usage, but I've certainly had to deal with it a lot. Just
used them to illustrate the point. Another issue with the same application was doing
age ranges. Simple to type ''30 to 45'' and annoying to have to type out
''30,31,32,33...'' etc.
What I'm curious about i
ance were a variable in a case would have been a
life saver.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Robertson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 3:36 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
implemented?)
No, the ZIPs aren'
CTED]
WWW: http://www.evoch.com/
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Rohan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:48 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
> implemented?)
>
>
> Since we are on
> No, the ZIPs aren't common usage, but I've certainly had
> to deal with it a lot. Just used them to illustrate the
> point. Another issue with the same application was doing
> age ranges. Simple to type ''30 to 45'' and annoying to
> have to type out ''30,31,32,33...'' etc.
Yea, I'd probably
> Since we are on a wish list, I would rather just have the
> ability to use variables in a case statement. Then you
> could do a hack like
>
> myrange="";
> for(i=30; i lt 45; i=i+1){
> devnull = listAppend(myrange,i,",");l
> }
>
>
>
> ...
>
> there have been other insta
(was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
implemented?)
> Since we are on a wish list, I would rather just have the
> ability to use variables in a case statement. Then you
> could do a hack like
>
> myrange="";
> for(i=30; i lt 45; i=i+1){
> devnul
On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 17:13 US/Pacific, S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
> There is another way to simulate variables or ranges in a case
> statement
> with a cftry and cfcatch blocks...
try/catch is a pretty heavy operation - you should only use it for
(unexpected) error cases, not normal operatio
switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is CFMX J2EE
>> implemented?)
>>
>>
>> try/catch is a pretty heavy operation - you should only use it for
>> (unexpected) error cases, not normal operation...
>>
> On Monday, Oct 14, 2002, at 17:13 US/Pacific, S. Isaac
> Dealey wrote:
>> There is another way to simulate variables or ranges in a
>> case statement with a cftry and cfcatch blocks...
> try/catch is a pretty heavy operation - you should only
> use it for (unexpected) error cases, not normal op
damn keyboard shortcuts...
>> I've used try catch for a number of non-error handling
>> items .. properly implemented, it works pretty well. Or at
>> least it has for me.
>
> Have you timed it? (I won't even start on the stylistic
> implications of this!)
I guess I probably should explicitely ti
ry / catch for flow control.
hope that helps...
mike chambers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: Kola Oyedeji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 4:33 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: switch-case was RE: BlueDragon (was RE: How is
On Tuesday, Oct 15, 2002, at 17:26 US/Pacific, S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
> Isaac the Butcher of Fusion ... :)
Careful, that might stick! :)
[horrific factorial implemented with try/catch snipped]
> Of course not... For starters, there are existing UDF's on cflib.org to
> handle factorials. :P And I
> On Tuesday, Oct 15, 2002, at 17:26 US/Pacific, S. Isaac
> Dealey wrote:
>> Isaac the Butcher of Fusion ... :)
> Careful, that might stick! :)
At least then I'd be assured a reputation. :)
> [horrific factorial implemented with try/catch snipped]
>> Of course not... For starters, there are exi
On Wednesday, Oct 16, 2002, at 06:13 US/Pacific, S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
>> [horrific factorial implemented with try/catch snipped]
> Yech... I pitty your server. :P
My Mac laptop, you mean? :)
In answer to Kola's question about try-catch in CF5: try-catch
generally introduces an overhead in eve
ficant performance overhead?
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Kola
>>
>> >> -Original Message-
>> >> From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> >> Sent: 15 October 2002 02:08
>>
On Tuesday, Oct 15, 2002, at 07:51 US/Pacific, S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
> I suppose I should clarify by saying that I haven't simply disregarded
> the
> original intent of all-together. I do use it mostly for error
> handling, although much of it is for custom error handling, such as
> server
> s
>> There have been a handful ( maybe a half dozen )
>> situations where I found
>> the was extremely helpful in creating an easily
>> human read/writeable
>> codeblock where the only alternative I could think of
>> would have been a horrible mess of spaghetti code.
> Yes, that is true. There are
20 matches
Mail list logo
