<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Challenge for ColdFusion Developers&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/</link>
	<description>Rich Internet solutions utilizing Flex, ActionScript, JavaScript, Dojo, Objective-C, and the iPhone</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:43:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Todd Rafferty</title>
		<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-228</link>
		<dc:creator>Todd Rafferty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kylehayes.info/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/07/A-Challenge-for-CF-Developers#comment-228</guid>
		<description>I concur.  I think this has been missing for a long time.  You have the WACK books, which are great for those just trying to learn and then, blam... dozens of communities revolving around either Fusebox, Mach-II, etc.  There doesn&#039;t seem to be an intermediate graceful direction between them all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I concur.  I think this has been missing for a long time.  You have the WACK books, which are great for those just trying to learn and then, blam&#8230; dozens of communities revolving around either Fusebox, Mach-II, etc.  There doesn&#8217;t seem to be an intermediate graceful direction between them all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Marshall</title>
		<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-229</link>
		<dc:creator>James Marshall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kylehayes.info/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/07/A-Challenge-for-CF-Developers#comment-229</guid>
		<description>As somebody who is wrestling with OO CF I agree with Todd that there needs to be more intermediate resources, but speaking as an experienced PHP programmer I have to say that I think that the online ColdFusion community is far more focused and close-knit than the PHP community. I may get shot down in flames here (by PHP people), but I think that the widespread adoption of PHP has served to water down the genuinely good resources with loads of substandard content.

Although it took me some time to fully immerse myself in the online CF community I now have about half a dozen blogs that I read daily and provide me with all the news and support I could ask for (apart from that elusive intermediate procedural-to-OOP resource)!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As somebody who is wrestling with OO CF I agree with Todd that there needs to be more intermediate resources, but speaking as an experienced PHP programmer I have to say that I think that the online ColdFusion community is far more focused and close-knit than the PHP community. I may get shot down in flames here (by PHP people), but I think that the widespread adoption of PHP has served to water down the genuinely good resources with loads of substandard content.</p>
<p>Although it took me some time to fully immerse myself in the online CF community I now have about half a dozen blogs that I read daily and provide me with all the news and support I could ask for (apart from that elusive intermediate procedural-to-OOP resource)!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyle Hayes</title>
		<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-230</link>
		<dc:creator>Kyle Hayes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kylehayes.info/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/07/A-Challenge-for-CF-Developers#comment-230</guid>
		<description>@James: Your type are exactly the kind of people I hope comment on this post. It is folks like you who we need to hear from. But I also found interesting what you said about the PHP community and I believe you are right.

I had to get full immersed into PHP a few years ago when CF was not an option for a project I was working on. I was surprised at the time, like you said, how watered down it was.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@James: Your type are exactly the kind of people I hope comment on this post. It is folks like you who we need to hear from. But I also found interesting what you said about the PHP community and I believe you are right.</p>
<p>I had to get full immersed into PHP a few years ago when CF was not an option for a project I was working on. I was surprised at the time, like you said, how watered down it was.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt Woodward</title>
		<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-231</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Woodward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kylehayes.info/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/07/A-Challenge-for-CF-Developers#comment-231</guid>
		<description>Totally agree Kyle--I made this comment in a blog post or article of some sort quite some time ago and I think it still holds true. When you learn Java, you don&#039;t learn a whole ton of syntax and then learn OOP as &quot;advanced Java.&quot; In Java literature you start with objects from day one because that&#039;s the way you&#039;re supposed to program in Java.

CF should be the same way. I agree that one of CF&#039;s major strengths is how easy it is to get into the language, so while we don&#039;t want to lose that, we also don&#039;t want to spend most of the time teaching people about the language features only to introduce CFCs as something &quot;advanced.&quot; Introduce things &quot;correctly&quot; (IMO anyway) from day one.

I took a Flex course recently that drove this point home. After a very simple &quot;Hello World&quot; example we immediately dove into custom events because they&#039;re at the heart of well-architected Flex applications. The same goes for CF--CFCs should be introduced very early so it doesn&#039;t turn into a huge mindshift later down the road.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Totally agree Kyle&#8211;I made this comment in a blog post or article of some sort quite some time ago and I think it still holds true. When you learn Java, you don&#8217;t learn a whole ton of syntax and then learn OOP as &quot;advanced Java.&quot; In Java literature you start with objects from day one because that&#8217;s the way you&#8217;re supposed to program in Java.</p>
<p>CF should be the same way. I agree that one of CF&#8217;s major strengths is how easy it is to get into the language, so while we don&#8217;t want to lose that, we also don&#8217;t want to spend most of the time teaching people about the language features only to introduce CFCs as something &quot;advanced.&quot; Introduce things &quot;correctly&quot; (IMO anyway) from day one.</p>
<p>I took a Flex course recently that drove this point home. After a very simple &quot;Hello World&quot; example we immediately dove into custom events because they&#8217;re at the heart of well-architected Flex applications. The same goes for CF&#8211;CFCs should be introduced very early so it doesn&#8217;t turn into a huge mindshift later down the road.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd Rafferty</title>
		<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-232</link>
		<dc:creator>Todd Rafferty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kylehayes.info/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/07/A-Challenge-for-CF-Developers#comment-232</guid>
		<description>I can agree with that.  One thing though, just because you can do OO with CFCs doesn&#039;t mean you have to.  It&#039;s one thing to be familiar with CFCs and use them, something else to apply OO principals to it all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can agree with that.  One thing though, just because you can do OO with CFCs doesn&#8217;t mean you have to.  It&#8217;s one thing to be familiar with CFCs and use them, something else to apply OO principals to it all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyle Hayes</title>
		<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-233</link>
		<dc:creator>Kyle Hayes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kylehayes.info/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/07/A-Challenge-for-CF-Developers#comment-233</guid>
		<description>@Matt and Todd: Both of you are right on this one...so...

We need to do something about this in that we need to get developers to recognize that CFCs are integral part to developing code...and not just stop there. We then need to show them how CFCs fit in to good object-oriented design.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Matt and Todd: Both of you are right on this one&#8230;so&#8230;</p>
<p>We need to do something about this in that we need to get developers to recognize that CFCs are integral part to developing code&#8230;and not just stop there. We then need to show them how CFCs fit in to good object-oriented design.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rand Thacker</title>
		<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-234</link>
		<dc:creator>Rand Thacker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kylehayes.info/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/07/A-Challenge-for-CF-Developers#comment-234</guid>
		<description>While I agree with your sentiments, I have to interject here.

An artist never starts off creating masterpieces.  The artist learns techniques, how to apply those techniques to different medium, etc.  Then, after having found the techniques and medium that they favor, that&#039;s when they hone their skills, and eventually make incredible works of art.

I feel that any programmer has to (learn / be taught) the proper techniques.  The programming languages are tools that one leverages to create internet goodness.  Each language has different strengths and weaknesses.  Sometimes you choose the language based on your proficiency, sometimes the language is chosen for you.

I guess after all this rambling, I agree with your basic premise, there needs to be a stronger drive in the CF community towards creating tutorials, example applications, etc. that focus on &quot;the best practices&quot;.

I&#039;ve seen plenty of posts on creating MVC applications in most of the frameworks, and that&#039;s all well and good.  But once that &quot;eureka&quot; moment hit me, and I started &lt;strong&gt;really&lt;/strong&gt; using CFCs as objects (instantiation, inheritance, etc.), it&#039;s really hard to even look at some of the old code that I wrote.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I agree with your sentiments, I have to interject here.</p>
<p>An artist never starts off creating masterpieces.  The artist learns techniques, how to apply those techniques to different medium, etc.  Then, after having found the techniques and medium that they favor, that&#8217;s when they hone their skills, and eventually make incredible works of art.</p>
<p>I feel that any programmer has to (learn / be taught) the proper techniques.  The programming languages are tools that one leverages to create internet goodness.  Each language has different strengths and weaknesses.  Sometimes you choose the language based on your proficiency, sometimes the language is chosen for you.</p>
<p>I guess after all this rambling, I agree with your basic premise, there needs to be a stronger drive in the CF community towards creating tutorials, example applications, etc. that focus on &quot;the best practices&quot;.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve seen plenty of posts on creating MVC applications in most of the frameworks, and that&#8217;s all well and good.  But once that &quot;eureka&quot; moment hit me, and I started &lt;strong&gt;really&lt;/strong&gt; using CFCs as objects (instantiation, inheritance, etc.), it&#8217;s really hard to even look at some of the old code that I wrote.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Terrence P Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-235</link>
		<dc:creator>Terrence P Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kylehayes.info/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/07/A-Challenge-for-CF-Developers#comment-235</guid>
		<description>I have to agree with Rand, and go a little further. In any discussion about Coldfusion adoption, that it is easy to learn, and doesn&#039;t constrain beginners is a good thing. Let people in the door, then hit them with best practices. One of the things I truly love about ColdFusion is how quickly someone can become productive. We shoudln&#039;t get rid of that because it gives people the freedom to write crappy code.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to agree with Rand, and go a little further. In any discussion about Coldfusion adoption, that it is easy to learn, and doesn&#8217;t constrain beginners is a good thing. Let people in the door, then hit them with best practices. One of the things I truly love about ColdFusion is how quickly someone can become productive. We shoudln&#8217;t get rid of that because it gives people the freedom to write crappy code.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrian J. Moreno</title>
		<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-236</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian J. Moreno</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kylehayes.info/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/07/A-Challenge-for-CF-Developers#comment-236</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been working on a couple of Primers about moving from procedural to OO programming with Coldfusion:

http://www.iknowkungfoo.com/blog/index.cfm/Primers

Now that MAX is over, I&#039;ll be adding more very soon.

I was at Brian&#039;s BOF sessions and had a lot of fun. Hopefully next year we can get more time for them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been working on a couple of Primers about moving from procedural to OO programming with Coldfusion:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.iknowkungfoo.com/blog/index.cfm/Primers" rel="nofollow">http://www.iknowkungfoo.com/blog/index.cfm/Primers</a></p>
<p>Now that MAX is over, I&#8217;ll be adding more very soon.</p>
<p>I was at Brian&#8217;s BOF sessions and had a lot of fun. Hopefully next year we can get more time for them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russ Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.kylehayes.info/2007/10/07/a-challenge-for-cf-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-237</link>
		<dc:creator>Russ Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kylehayes.info/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/07/A-Challenge-for-CF-Developers#comment-237</guid>
		<description>I too learned the &quot;old way&quot; of ColdFusion development. I started writing apps against CF 3 so there was no thinking of OO back then for CF. Now after learning OO concepts and using several of the frameworks available, I write everything in that manner and prefer ColdBox as my framework. So I agree with alot of what you are saying.

However, I think we as a community, need to be careful not to put ColdFusion into a box. We have to be very careful not to over-commit to the OOCF ways of doing things and forget that one of the biggest draws of ColdFusion is its strength as a rapid application development language. Thats one of the things that pulls a lot of newer developers to ColdFusion. We as a community have to conitinue to support that as well as do a better job of transitioning those newer developers to doing things in an OO manner.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I too learned the &quot;old way&quot; of ColdFusion development. I started writing apps against CF 3 so there was no thinking of OO back then for CF. Now after learning OO concepts and using several of the frameworks available, I write everything in that manner and prefer ColdBox as my framework. So I agree with alot of what you are saying.</p>
<p>However, I think we as a community, need to be careful not to put ColdFusion into a box. We have to be very careful not to over-commit to the OOCF ways of doing things and forget that one of the biggest draws of ColdFusion is its strength as a rapid application development language. Thats one of the things that pulls a lot of newer developers to ColdFusion. We as a community have to conitinue to support that as well as do a better job of transitioning those newer developers to doing things in an OO manner.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
