[thesite] if anyones bored..

[.jeff]

rudy,

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> From: rudy
>
> the tough part is all the application structure --
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

agreed.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> which session variables are assumed to exist on the
> page, [...]
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

session scoped variables are treated as a structure so it should be easy
enough to do a loop over that collection and output the values if there are
any questions.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> query results stored in arrays,
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

i know which query you're talking about and it's only done in one place.
it's actually query results that are stored in an application scoped
variable.  most users working on the site should never have to bother with
that.  all other queries that i'm aware of are the usual that any coldfusion
developer should be familiar with.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> includes all over the place,
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

there really *is* some structure to the includes, i promise.  i wonder if
there's some way i can document it so it can be easier to understand.
anybody got any ideas?

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> urls that are actually 404 includes...
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

when encountering the app, i can understand this tidbit being intimidating.
however, once you understand how the directory style urls drive the site
surely that can't be as much of an issue anymore.  i mean, it's just a
decision tree for nearly every directory name until you arrive at the
template performing the action.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> [...] they do not need to learn cold fusion (or if they
> do, they could surely make the switch from another
> language like php quite easily), rather they need to
> learn *our application*
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

precisely what i've been trying to say.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> i am sure that if -- and i'm against this -- we were to
> re-code the entire site in php, the same sort of
> situation would exist
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

again, exactly what i'm trying to say.

thanks,

.jeff

http://evolt.org/
jeff at members.evolt.org
http://members.evolt.org/jeff/