Home of the ColdFusion Community
|
Mailing Lists
|
Home /
Groups /
ColdFusion Talk (CF-Talk)
after a long hiatus back to talk about frameworks
Author: LRS Scout
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351108
FW/1 is pretty awesome, and I like ColdBox as well, both are easy to learn
and solve a lot of pretty common issues,
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Russ Michaels <russ@michaels.me.uk> wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Russ Michaels
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351103
its funny how the simple things tend to stay the same.
I created my first framework/methodology more than 10 years ago now back in
the days of CF4.5, it was a really simple affair that had a global config
file and allowed you to pass ACTIONS on the URL to specify which section
(component or controller by today's standards I guess) and method to call.
Inside each section (folder) you had a pagemaster.cfm which defined the
layout (view) for each section and passed control to sub-sections (e.g.
index.cfm?section1.subsection.action).
Then along came fusebox which did pretty much the same thing although with
a lot more bloat, and fw/1 pretty much works along those lines too.
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:50 PM, John M Bliss <bliss.john@gmail.com> wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: John M Bliss
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351102
Since we're plugging our favorites, be sure to check out http://cfwheels.org
Very sexy. :-)
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Jake Churchill <reynacho@gmail.com>
wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Jake Churchill
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351101
FW/1 is nice. It has it's nuances but it allows for a very clean
implementation as long as you stick to it.
-Jake
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Mark A. Kruger
<mkruger@cfwebtools.com>wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Mark A. Kruger
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351100
I'd agree that FW/1 is the natural FB successor - and it allows you to break
it's mold without killing the whole thing (mostly because it's implemented
as a single CFC - quite ingeneous).
Mark Kruger - CFG
CF Webtools
www.cfwebtools.com
www.coldfusionmuse.com
O: 402.408.3733 x105
E: mkruger@cfwebtools.com
Skype: markakruger
I'm not afraid to poke the stormcloud :)
Fusebox went unsupported for a number of years and there was some drama
about who owned the source code (it predates modern open source licenses).
There was a failed fork and then the community stepped in and created a
barrage of better frameworks. Recently, Fusebox has been open-sourced (on
github) and there is a small team of people working on the next version. It
may be too little and too late, but still probably a worthy effort. Even
still, I would not recommend going that way.
Many people believe Framework/1 (fw1.riaforge.org) is the true successor to
Fusebox. It implements a couple features the same way, and it was created
by the FB 5 and 5.5 primary developer Sean Corfield.
Depending on the size of what you plan to build, you may be able to shrink
your selection. The more "enterprise" options are probably Mach-II,
Model-Glue and ColdBox. They do a lot and have a lot going for them.
ColdBox is the younger of the three, and probably best documented, Louis
also does great training classes. Model-Glue hasn't seen a lot of action
lately. Model-Glue and Mach-II are heavily XML based and (to me) can get
overwhelming. The more casual options are probably cfwheels and FW/1, but
like John Bliss said, go with whichever works with your way of thinking.
(I hope I offended everyone with this ;)
nathan strutz
[www.dopefly.com] [hi.im/nathanstrutz] [about.me/nathanstrutz]
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Matt Quackenbush
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351097
Nathan is DA MAN! :-)
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SII
On May 9, 2012 9:48 PM, "Don" <danfarmer@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >Maybe what you are looking for isn't going to be solved by a framework,
but
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
and
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
important
> >than marrying yourself to any specific framework.
>
> Hi Nathan, many thanks for your links. I really like how you've broken
the whole MVC down into the most basic bite sized chunks.... your approach
was very straight forward and easily digestible. IE - you wrote how I
think. Well done and thanks again.
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351096
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Hi Nathan, many thanks for your links. I really like how you've broken the whole
MVC down into the most basic bite sized chunks.... your approach was very
straight forward and easily digestible. IE - you wrote how I think. Well done and
thanks again.
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351095
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Yes thanks Nathan, this has been an excellent addition. I would much rather stick
to my own style while integrating a MVC approach... I'm not big on abstraction
and would rather keep it as simple as possible.
Author: Matt Quackenbush
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351094
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
+infinity
Author: Nathan Strutz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351093
> I was going to ask, "which frameworks are the most popular" in terms of
> actual employment statistics but even then, it might all be a waste of time
> if my next contract doesn't use ( framework x,y, or z ).
>
>
Maybe what you are looking for isn't going to be solved by a framework, but
by a better methodology. By far, the most popular way to write web
applications these days, an improvement over the old Fusebox days, and
certainly enabled (and sometimes forced) by all the frameworks, is MVC.
The Model-View-Controller pattern is pretty ideal for web applications, and
is one of the best tools we developers have these days. You can do it
without a framework, it's not hard (
www.dopefly.com/techblog/entry.cfm?entry=307 and
www.dopefly.com/techblog/entry.cfm?entry=308), and it's much more important
than marrying yourself to any specific framework.
nathan strutz
[www.dopefly.com] [hi.im/nathanstrutz] [about.me/nathanstrutz]
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Russ Michaels
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351092
Lol, quite possibly, waz it an interview at loud n clear, the md always
endded up dragging everyone to the pub.
Regards
Russ Michaels
From my mobile
On 9 May 2012 18:24, "Don" <danfarmer@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Russ, did I meet you in the UK a few years ago, you offered me some beer
> on a job interview? Lol
Author: Judah McAuley
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351090
As an example of this, learning MVC and DI in Coldbox made it much
easier to dive into .Net MVC when I was working in a .Net/C# shop.
There were certainly some differences in how things were done in each
framework (Coldbox was better than .Net MVC in pretty much every way,
though .Net MVC got much better in later versions) but the concepts
were mostly the same. I understood models, controllers, views, helper
functions, dependency injection, etc and it became a matter of picking
up the particulars of the new framework and the differences in
underlying language (CF vs C#). Definitely helpful to me as a
developer.
Judah
>
> My comment still applies. Even if you learn and forget all of those
> frameworks in succession, because most of them feature MVC/OO/ORM/etc, that
> stuff should stick.
Author: Maureen
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351088
Agreed. I'm porting a number of sites to FW/1 on Railo and I've found
the communities and developers for both to be extremely helpful.
Also, in my experience FW/1 is much easier to implement than Fusebox.
>
>>> Many people believe Framework/1 (fw1.riaforge.org) is the true
successor> to Fusebox.
>
>
+1
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351084
Russ, did I meet you in the UK a few years ago, you offered me some beer on a job
interview? Lol
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351083
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Another excellent point. I mean ease of use was one of the reasons I chose and
was directed at CF years ago. Really, I am between contracts right now, I figure
to apply some framework on personal projects to keep my skills up to a degree but
also to allow for possibility of expansion of those projects onto higher levels
in the future.
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351082
I may just stick with FB for now, I already am comfortable with it. The path of
least resistance... Lol
Author: Russ Michaels
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351081
I think much of it overshadows and diminishes what CFML's biggest
advantage has always been, which is simplicity to use and ease to learn,
CFML is itself a RAD Framework for JAVA don;t forget.
If a newbie comes along here they are invariably told to use OOP, use MVC,
use a framework, use cfscript and all the other most complex parts of CF,
which rather defeats the point of using CFML doesn't it.
The average newbie to CF really only needs to learn a handful of tags and
functions to do what he needs on a basic site, even CFC's are not required.
The frameworks, OOP and MVC topic really belongs in the realm of advanced
developers who need this stuff and enterprise apps, the newbie and dabbler
really shouldn't need to feel pressured into learning this stuff if they
don;t need it.
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:00 PM, <> wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: John M Bliss
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351080
For certain breeds of unique problem, that's probably true.
For most breeds of common problem, let's not spend a week or two developing
a custom framework before problem-solving commences.
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:00 PM, <> wrote:
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Claude_Schnéegans
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351079
>>Frameworks exist because they help solve problems
This is why the "best" framework is the one you design yourself to solve your
problems.
Solutions for other people's problems ar not always good for you and may even
cause more problems you will ever
encounter.
Author: John M Bliss
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351078
I know. I was proposing a reason why "wasting my time because if I don't
use a thing everyday it doesn't get imprinted" might not apply.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351077
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Yes, Jon, that's a good point.
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351076
>My comment still applies. Even if you learn and forget all of those
>frameworks in succession, because most of them feature MVC/OO/ORM/etc, that
>stuff should stick.
>
Yes everyone's comment applies,I was not intending to diminish anyone's
perspective. :)
Author: John M Bliss
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351075
My comment still applies. Even if you learn and forget all of those
frameworks in succession, because most of them feature MVC/OO/ORM/etc, that
stuff should stick.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351074
"But focusing on 'which framework is more popular' and 'which framework
may go away' seems a bit silly."
I don't think so. The reason being is that I don't like wasting my time because
if I don't use a thing everyday it doesn't get imprinted. For example - I've
gotten semi proficient in java several times only to have the knowledge dissapear
on account of lack of use.
Popularity would also be a good indicator of job prospect, which is a good
indicator of how much money I can potentially make. Remember this ( for me )
about expending the least amount of energy for maximum results.
Author: Russ Michaels
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351071
I am still seeing a lot of legacy apps using fusebox, in perm jobs and
contracts, so no harm in knowing it.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Raymond Camden
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351072
Frameworks exist because they help solve problems - typically problems
that are common and many people have experienced in the past. These
problems are not going to go away. Yes, a particular framework X may
go away, but learning it will not be a waste of time as you will gain
the experience of how it can help you solve those problems. Personally
I think you are making a mistake if you just ignore them.
To be clear, I'm not saying every project needs a framework. Heck no.
You want to ensure you actually have problems before you go trying to
solve them. ;)
But focusing on 'which framework is more popular' and 'which framework
may go away' seems a bit silly.
As it stands - the "big boys" in our world have been around for years:
Model-Glue, Mach II, ColdBox. Even FW/1 is a bit old now. I don't
think you have to worry about them going away anytime soon.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: John M Bliss
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351073
Right...but...learning a new framework or two, depending on which you
choose and how you use 'em, will make you a better MVC'er, OO'er, ORM'er,
Frameworker, etc...
...if you take my meaning. And most/all of those things are likely to help
you land your next job, regardless of which framework(s) they do or do not
use.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351070
But my approach to frameworks has been to 'wait and see'. Because I don't like
wasting my time. I need to do something on a daily basis other wise it wont
stick.
I delayed learning any Framework and then just learned fusebox at a job/contract.
I was going to ask, "which frameworks are the most popular" in terms of actual
employment statistics but even then, it might all be a waste of time if my next
contract doesn't use ( framework x,y, or z ). So I think I'll continue conserving
my energy and just focus on CF. Maybe checkout FW/1 for my own projects from what
a few here have said about it. didn't find the documention all that great though.
Author: Gerald Guido
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351063
>> Many people believe Framework/1 (fw1.riaforge.org) is the true successor
to
Fusebox.
+1
I ran into this the other day:
CFMeetup 2011_0303 "Simple MVC with FW/1", with Daria Norris
http://vimeo.com/21864956
That should get you started with FW/1 in (fairly) short order.
HTH
G!
> Many people believe Framework/1 (fw1.riaforge.org) is the true successor
> to
> Fusebox. It implements a couple features the same way, and it was created
> by the FB 5 and 5.5 primary developer Sean Corfield.
>
--
Gerald Guido
http://www.myinternetisbroken.com
Author: Nathan Strutz
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351062
I'm not afraid to poke the stormcloud :)
Fusebox went unsupported for a number of years and there was some drama
about who owned the source code (it predates modern open source licenses).
There was a failed fork and then the community stepped in and created a
barrage of better frameworks. Recently, Fusebox has been open-sourced (on
github) and there is a small team of people working on the next version. It
may be too little and too late, but still probably a worthy effort. Even
still, I would not recommend going that way.
Many people believe Framework/1 (fw1.riaforge.org) is the true successor to
Fusebox. It implements a couple features the same way, and it was created
by the FB 5 and 5.5 primary developer Sean Corfield.
Depending on the size of what you plan to build, you may be able to shrink
your selection. The more "enterprise" options are probably Mach-II,
Model-Glue and ColdBox. They do a lot and have a lot going for them.
ColdBox is the younger of the three, and probably best documented, Louis
also does great training classes. Model-Glue hasn't seen a lot of action
lately. Model-Glue and Mach-II are heavily XML based and (to me) can get
overwhelming. The more casual options are probably cfwheels and FW/1, but
like John Bliss said, go with whichever works with your way of thinking.
(I hope I offended everyone with this ;)
nathan strutz
[www.dopefly.com] [hi.im/nathanstrutz] [about.me/nathanstrutz]
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351061
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
thanks guys. Wow, some old names I still remember. =)
Author: Russ Michaels
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351052
some resources which may help you getting back into CF
www.cf411.com
www.cfsearch.com
www.cfmldeveloper.com
from these you can most likely find everything else you need
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: John M Bliss
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351051
Anecdotally:
- http://cfwheels.org
- http://coldbox.org <http://www.coldbox.org/>;
- http://fusebox.org <http://www.fusebox.org/>;
- http://mach-ii.com <http://www.mach-ii.com/>;
- http://fw1.riaforge.org
- http://ontap.riaforge.org
- and others
I recommend picking whichever seems to line up best with your way of
thinking about things (or the way you'd *like* to think about things) and
go with it.
----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----
Author: Don
Short Link: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/thread.cfm/threadid:63903#351050
Hi, its been a while since I did any CF work. I am wondering what framework seems
to be popular right now.
I did a bit of fusebox and liked it. But am wondering about the others out there.
I noticed CF builder 2 didn't have any support for it as did CFEclipse. I find
that odd. Has FB gone 'out of fashion' ?
I would like something that worked liked objects.. I can't remember if FB did
that very well.
|
June 19, 2013
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
