@Kai
I did not say “tag based custom tags”, it was “cfm” vs. “cfc”, my problem
with “CFM based custom tags” is that they have a different approach with
scoping like I explained in detail, I don’t want to have because in a clean
start i don’t need 2 different scoping concepts.
Like i also question 2 scopes with the same range and the same lifecycle.
MichaOn Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Kai Koenig <@Kai_Koenig> wrote:
So, what would stop you from just including a cfm file with your UI
stuff if you want it inside a cfc? To me that is the cleaner approach.
this is like asking “why do we need functions or custom tags in the
language when we can just write the function’s body into a snippet and use
cfinclude…”there are times when you want to include a snippet/template, there are
times when you want to use custom tags, and there are times when you want
to use functions.Two notes:
Funny, in another thread I was told by Micha that tag-based custom tags
are bad and should not exist — that we all should use component-based
custom tags because it’s all about the simplification and cleanup of the
language…Unless someone finally provides a realistic and non-abstract (“there
are times when…”) appropriate use case of using tags over script in a
component, I will continue to call bullsh*t on people who suggest that’d be
a good idea in language design in this or any other parallel universe.Cheers
Kai–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“Lucee” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to lucee+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lucee@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lucee/BEF9AFA4-67FD-4EE5-86B3-2098B935076B%40gmail.com
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.