Val Raemaekers
|
| Posted: 04/20/2001, 12:23 AM |
|
Hi There,
When will the coldfusion templates be finished properly.
To be more specific, when will we have a CF + templates set.
I don't see the point in wasting time on asp.net templates, when the .net
platform is still in beta 1, where as coldfusion has been out for 6 years,
much longer then php, asp, jsp etc ...
Regards,
Val
|
|
|
 |
CodeCharge
|
| Posted: 04/20/2001, 4:29 PM |
|
Are there any issues with pure ColdFusion code generation ?
There are no immediate plans for implementing ColdFusion patterns with
Templates.
A request by one person may not be sufficient to put off other requests in
favor of this one.
I also don't see the relevance of the amount of time ColdFusion was in
existence. People who program in ASP, JSP, Perl or PHP won't switch to
ColdFusion just because it's older 
"Val Raemaekers" <val@valtronics.co.za> wrote in message
news:9boo4j$jb6$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> Hi There,
>
> When will the coldfusion templates be finished properly.
> To be more specific, when will we have a CF + templates set.
>
> I don't see the point in wasting time on asp.net templates, when the .net
> platform is still in beta 1, where as coldfusion has been out for 6 years,
> much longer then php, asp, jsp etc ...
>
> Regards,
> Val
>
>
|
|
|
|
Val Raemaekers
|
| Posted: 04/20/2001, 11:02 PM |
|
Actually I had one issue with Coldfusion code generation, which was fixed by
codecharge within 24 hours.(Excellent support, thank you !)
As for my request for a Coldfusion + templates pattern,
I see nothing unreasonable in it. After all you have ASP + templates, PHP +
templates, JSP+templates ,Perl + templates ....
Where is CF + templates ??
As for how long Coldfusion has been out, what I actually meant is that I
maybe the only one asking for this, but there are over 500000 potential
codecharge customers out there who use CF ....
Regards,
Val
"CodeCharge" <support@codecharge.com> wrote in message
news:9bqgp6$r70$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> Are there any issues with pure ColdFusion code generation ?
> There are no immediate plans for implementing ColdFusion patterns with
> Templates.
> A request by one person may not be sufficient to put off other requests in
> favor of this one.
>
> I also don't see the relevance of the amount of time ColdFusion was in
> existence. People who program in ASP, JSP, Perl or PHP won't switch to
> ColdFusion just because it's older
>
>
> "Val Raemaekers" <val@valtronics.co.za> wrote in message
>news:9boo4j$jb6$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> > Hi There,
> >
> > When will the coldfusion templates be finished properly.
> > To be more specific, when will we have a CF + templates set.
> >
> > I don't see the point in wasting time on asp.net templates, when the
..net
> > platform is still in beta 1, where as coldfusion has been out for 6
years,
> > much longer then php, asp, jsp etc ...
> >
> > Regards,
> > Val
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
|
CodeCharge
|
| Posted: 04/21/2001, 1:19 PM |
|
Val,
For some reasons we actually didn't anticipate that the generation of
ColdFusion with templates will be needed or important.
That's why we'd like to validate your point with other users.
Adam
"Val Raemaekers" <val@valtronics.co.za> wrote in message
news:9br7q1$2jq$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> Actually I had one issue with Coldfusion code generation, which was fixed
by
> codecharge within 24 hours.(Excellent support, thank you !)
>
> As for my request for a Coldfusion + templates pattern,
> I see nothing unreasonable in it. After all you have ASP + templates, PHP
+
> templates, JSP+templates ,Perl + templates ....
>
> Where is CF + templates ??
>
> As for how long Coldfusion has been out, what I actually meant is that I
> maybe the only one asking for this, but there are over 500000 potential
> codecharge customers out there who use CF ....
>
> Regards,
> Val
> "CodeCharge" <support@codecharge.com> wrote in message
>news:9bqgp6$r70$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> > Are there any issues with pure ColdFusion code generation ?
> > There are no immediate plans for implementing ColdFusion patterns with
> > Templates.
> > A request by one person may not be sufficient to put off other requests
in
> > favor of this one.
> >
> > I also don't see the relevance of the amount of time ColdFusion was in
> > existence. People who program in ASP, JSP, Perl or PHP won't switch to
> > ColdFusion just because it's older
> >
> >
> > "Val Raemaekers" <val@valtronics.co.za> wrote in message
> >news:9boo4j$jb6$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> > > Hi There,
> > >
> > > When will the coldfusion templates be finished properly.
> > > To be more specific, when will we have a CF + templates set.
> > >
> > > I don't see the point in wasting time on asp.net templates, when the
> .net
> > > platform is still in beta 1, where as coldfusion has been out for 6
> years,
> > > much longer then php, asp, jsp etc ...
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Val
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
|
Eladesor
|
| Posted: 04/21/2001, 2:30 PM |
|
<snip>
Val, you have partialy answered your own question. CF may be good, but
people have moved on during the last six years. From my own point of view, I
prefer CC to be proactive and dynamic, and yes 'backward' compatable to an
extent but not if it inhibits what the majority of users prefer.
Regards
Eladesor.
|
|
|
|
Val Raemaekers
|
| Posted: 04/22/2001, 12:49 AM |
|
Eladesor,
Backward compatible ?
In any event, to be backward compatible, there should be a CF + templates
pattern ...
Val
"Eladesor" <Eladesor@NOSPAMbtinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9bsu5f$10r$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> <snip>
> Val, you have partialy answered your own question. CF may be good, but
> people have moved on during the last six years. From my own point of view,
I
> prefer CC to be proactive and dynamic, and yes 'backward' compatable to an
> extent but not if it inhibits what the majority of users prefer.
>
> Regards
> Eladesor.
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
Michael Weaver
|
| Posted: 04/22/2001, 10:17 AM |
|
I thought that most Coldfusion users used ColdFusion Studio instead of third
party programs. Truthfully, most people I've seen posting have had questions
about PHP + MySql or PostgreSQL or ASP + Access or SQL server. I agree that
there is a large CF user base, but there doesn't seem to be a large CF & CC
user base. Or maybe it works so well that they don't ever post questions.
I haven't used CF for 2 years, but the output that CC generates looks solid
to me.
In any event, with or without the templates, it seems to be the same amount
of work to edit, unless you are dividing the work up for several people -
some to work in CF and some in HTML/design who have no knowledge of CF. It
looks as though the head and body tags are in one file while the contents
are in other files. If you want it to be easier switch to ASP for Windows
servers (boo) or PHP for linux/unix (yeah!).
michael
"Val Raemaekers" <val@valtronics.co.za> wrote in message
news:9bu2el$ui4$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> Eladesor,
> Backward compatible ?
> In any event, to be backward compatible, there should be a CF + templates
> pattern ...
> Val
>
> "Eladesor" <Eladesor@NOSPAMbtinternet.com> wrote in message
>news:9bsu5f$10r$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> > <snip>
> > Val, you have partialy answered your own question. CF may be good, but
> > people have moved on during the last six years. From my own point of
view,
> I
> > prefer CC to be proactive and dynamic, and yes 'backward' compatable to
an
> > extent but not if it inhibits what the majority of users prefer.
> >
> > Regards
> > Eladesor.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
|
Val Raemaekers
|
| Posted: 04/22/2001, 10:32 AM |
|
Michael,
I do have a team of webdesigners(html programmers) and coldfusion
programmers, as well as an asp programmer and a couple of PHP guys. Because
of this, I got very interested in Codecharge, but to make them all work
together optimally, I need a CF + templates pattern ...
We do consulting work, and rather then trying to convince a corporate
enduser to use what we want to use, we go with what they are using already
....
(We don't do java and perl, but we do have a demand for .net)
Regards,
Val
"Michael Weaver" <michaelw@sc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:9bv3mu$qmn$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> I thought that most Coldfusion users used ColdFusion Studio instead of
third
> party programs. Truthfully, most people I've seen posting have had
questions
> about PHP + MySql or PostgreSQL or ASP + Access or SQL server. I agree
that
> there is a large CF user base, but there doesn't seem to be a large CF &
CC
> user base. Or maybe it works so well that they don't ever post questions.
>
> I haven't used CF for 2 years, but the output that CC generates looks
solid
> to me.
>
> In any event, with or without the templates, it seems to be the same
amount
> of work to edit, unless you are dividing the work up for several people -
> some to work in CF and some in HTML/design who have no knowledge of CF. It
> looks as though the head and body tags are in one file while the contents
> are in other files. If you want it to be easier switch to ASP for Windows
> servers (boo) or PHP for linux/unix (yeah!).
>
> michael
>
> "Val Raemaekers" <val@valtronics.co.za> wrote in message
>news:9bu2el$ui4$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> > Eladesor,
> > Backward compatible ?
> > In any event, to be backward compatible, there should be a CF +
templates
> > pattern ...
> > Val
> >
> > "Eladesor" <Eladesor@NOSPAMbtinternet.com> wrote in message
> >news:9bsu5f$10r$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> > > <snip>
> > > Val, you have partialy answered your own question. CF may be good, but
> > > people have moved on during the last six years. From my own point of
> view,
> > I
> > > prefer CC to be proactive and dynamic, and yes 'backward' compatable
to
> an
> > > extent but not if it inhibits what the majority of users prefer.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Eladesor.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
|
|
|
|
CodeCharge
|
| Posted: 06/28/2001, 1:26 AM |
|
We have scheduled ColdFusion & Templates implementation.
Depending on other tasks, this may take between 4-12 weeks.
"Val Raemaekers" <val@valtronics.co.za> wrote in message
news:9boo4j$jb6$1@mail.tankhill.com...
> Hi There,
>
> When will the coldfusion templates be finished properly.
> To be more specific, when will we have a CF + templates set.
>
> I don't see the point in wasting time on asp.net templates, when the .net
> platform is still in beta 1, where as coldfusion has been out for 6 years,
> much longer then php, asp, jsp etc ...
>
> Regards,
> Val
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
