I hate writing CRUD statements !!!!

[Guest]

Is there anything commonly used within the Coldfusion community to accelerate the writing of your basic t-sql statements ??? (insert, select, update, delete). Whenever developing coldfusion apps, I seem to spend an obscene amount of my time manually writing a model for these when I'd be rather be focusing on writing the harder logic. CFINSERT and CFUPDATE are not really real world options.

I imagine if you want to use the cfqueryparam tag where appropriate, it would add another layer of complexity when trying to auto generate a model for a db table.

What are our options ? if any !!

The marketing line for CF, when compared to other server-side web technologies, is that it is more suited for faster development of applications. If that is the case, I'm not sure if working with DB's was considered. I believe other technologies offer more in terms of helping you with the repetitive basics.

[Newsgroup_User]

re: The marketing line for CF, when compared to other server-side web
technologies, is that it is more suited for faster development of
applications.

Thats the bigggest load of guff. It was true to a degree ten years ago - but
now CF is severely lagging behind the likes of Asp.Net and RoR. In CF world,
you pretty much write all the code yourself.

Suggest you download the free Visual Web Developer to see some real
productivity. Or have a crack at RoR. Don't switch from CF as it has some
real advantages, but you should at least learn how/why CF is not really
suited to "faster development of applications" and understand that CF is
actually quite tedious by comparison.

re: is that it is more suited for faster development of applications.

Why would you believe that? What does CF have that can't be considered in
other languages? It uses tags - so what, therey're just the equivalent of
functions (lets call them "abstractions that simplify" ). Even crummy ole
php has a crap load more of these than cf does. Asp.Net not only has many
more, but allows for them to be worked with atrue RAD environment.

If you like the syntax - great. If you love the fact that cf comes with
charts and don't want to download free charting tools -great. And there are
many other good reasons to stick with CF. But if you belive that CF is
suited more than other modern technologies to Rapid Development, take a
reality check before continuing. For starters, the later technologies were
developed from the ground up to address the need for rapid development - so
it's hardly likley they all got it wrong and somehow left CF as the winner
in the RAD market is it?









"Swampie" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:f9ojah$re0$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Is there anything commonly used within the Coldfusion community to
> accelerate
> the writing of your basic t-sql statements ??? (insert, select, update,
> delete). Whenever developing coldfusion apps, I seem to spend an obscene
> amount
> of my time manually writing a model for these when I'd be rather be
> focusing on
> writing the harder logic. CFINSERT and CFUPDATE are not really real world
> options.
>
> I imagine if you want to use the cfqueryparam tag where appropriate, it
> would
> add another layer of complexity when trying to auto generate a model for a
> db
> table.
>
> What are our options ? if any !!
>
> The marketing line for CF, when compared to other server-side web
> technologies, is that it is more suited for faster development of
> applications.
> If that is the case, I'm not sure if working with DB's was considered. I
> believe other technologies offer more in terms of helping you with the
> repetitive basics.
>
>

[cf_dev2]

You might be interested in Brian Rinaldi's cfcgenerator
http://code.google.com/p/cfcgenerator/

[Newsgroup_User]

In article <f9ojah$re0$1@forums.macromedia.com> "Swampie"
<webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote:
> Is there anything commonly used within the Coldfusion community to
> accelerate the writing of your basic t-sql statements ???

Transfer ORM.

< http://transfer.riaforge.org/>

Similar ORMs are Reactor and objectBreeze.

Sean Corfield
An Architect's View -- < http://corfield.org/>

--
I'm using an evaluation license of nemo since 68 days.
You should really try it!
http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

[Guest]

@cf_dev2

Thanks for the tip. I'll check it out.

@Campaq

With the exposure I've had to other technologies, I could not agree with you more. It's frustrating supporting our legacy CF stuff when you used to doing it quicker elsewhere.

The marketing spiel I mentioned above was presented to me from Adobe reps at a recent conference. CF often is overlooked amongst corporates due to questions on robustness and scalability (rightly or wrongly). In response to this, Adobe have stated you should consider using CF for prototyping and rapid development and, if there is take up, move it to other technologies if you have concerns about scalability within CF. Strange..I know.

[Newsgroup_User]

In article <f9otdh$8kf$1@forums.macromedia.com> "Swampie"
<webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote:
> The marketing spiel I mentioned above was presented to me from
> Adobe reps at a recent conference. CF often is overlooked amongst
> corporates due to questions on robustness and scalability (rightly or
> wrongly). In response to this, Adobe have stated you should consider
> using CF for prototyping and rapid development and, if there is take
> up, move it to other technologies if you have concerns about
> scalability within CF. Strange..I know.

Who specifically at Adobe told you that?

Either they need educating or you misunderstood them - so it's
important to name them so we can address what they actually said.

Sean Corfield
An Architect's View -- < http://corfield.org/>

--
I'm using an evaluation license of nemo since 68 days.
You should really try it!
http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

[MaryJo]

If you're used to using something else, than obviously you are likely to be faster working in that, versus something you are less comfortable in. For every .Net disciple like our troll here, there are many CF developers that find it far faster to work in than other options. Part of that is because there *are* lots of tools for doing the basics. Just look at all the great frameworks available... pick the best for you and/or your application and a lot of the work is done for you. Eclipse makes it even easier now with the frameworks browser. And for Crud...well, just get the Flexbuilder Extensions for Eclipse. They come with not only RDS support, but also wizards that will build out all your CRUD CFCs automatically. You can google to find others that have been written, there's a bunch out there, as well as the other's already listed here. Here's another one I ran across:

http://icegen.riaforge.org/

[Newsgroup_User]

re: > With the exposure I've had to other technologies, I could not agree
with you
> more.

Sorry, assumed you were just starting out! (clearly not) I always wade in
when I see "newbs" on a bum steer.

re: It's frustrating supporting our legacy CF stuff when you used to doing
it
> quicker elsewhere.

I get in the other way around - converting cf code to newer RAD code.

re: CF often is overlooked amongst corporates due to questions
> on robustness and scalability (rightly or wrongly).

Not really the case these days - though MM/Adobe addressed it far too late.
Asp/php an dothers had largely killed it off before they addressed the
problems. CFs main problem is that it is so sloooow and painful to develop
with once you want to do more than just "script" a few pages togther. Adobe
keep trying to convince people that tags are not functions, but magical
creatures that write applications all on their own. People kind of know
these days that they are just functions and that CF doesn't even have that
many of them by comparison.




"Swampie" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:f9otdh$8kf$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> @cf_dev2
>
> Thanks for the tip. I'll check it out.
>
> @Campaq
>
> With the exposure I've had to other technologies, I could not agree with
> you
> more. It's frustrating supporting our legacy CF stuff when you used to
> doing it
> quicker elsewhere.
>
> The marketing spiel I mentioned above was presented to me from Adobe reps
> at a
> recent conference. CF often is overlooked amongst corporates due to
> questions
> on robustness and scalability (rightly or wrongly). In response to this,
> Adobe
> have stated you should consider using CF for prototyping and rapid
> development
> and, if there is take up, move it to other technologies if you have
> concerns
> about scalability within CF. Strange..I know.
>

[Newsgroup_User]

Mary Jo - could have swore you made a point last week how its a pain to have
to download everything and how cf comes with everything out of the box. (may
not have been you admittedly)

CF is a pest on so many levels, but almost unarguably it is SLOOOW to work
with by comparison to truly rad platforms. It has no IDE and eclipse look
like amateur hour compared to whats available elsehwere.



"MaryJo" <maryjo@cfwebstore.com> wrote in message
news:f9ou9i$9d1$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> If you're used to using something else, than obviously you are likely to
> be
> faster working in that, versus something you are less comfortable in. For
> every
> .Net disciple like our troll here, there are many CF developers that find
> it
> far faster to work in than other options. Part of that is because there
> *are*
> lots of tools for doing the basics. Just look at all the great frameworks
> available... pick the best for you and/or your application and a lot of
> the
> work is done for you. Eclipse makes it even easier now with the frameworks
> browser. And for Crud...well, just get the Flexbuilder Extensions for
> Eclipse.
> They come with not only RDS support, but also wizards that will build out
> all
> your CRUD CFCs automatically. You can google to find others that have been
> written, there's a bunch out there, as well as the other's already listed
> here.
> Here's another one I ran across:
>
> http://icegen.riaforge.org/
>
>

[Guest]

Sean,

I'm afraid I don't have a name. I went to MAX06 mainly to talk to people about LiveCycle, not necessarily CF. It may have come from a representative stationed at one of those stands. I realise in a forum like this it becomes hearsay but the comment stuck with me. We were poised to move to .Net and I was wiling to take on board anything that would help me justify a continued investment in CF within our organization. However, since I've had my first real exposure to .Net in the last 12 months, I was only now beginning to question what I understood I had been told.

I didn't intend to kick start an anti-CF discussion. CF is great. It's been my bread and butter for years. I was just having a bad day

[MaryJo]

Don't worry about it Swampie....our anti-CF troll here just scours the forums looking for any topic that he can even possibly turn in that direction. You'll notice he didn't offer you any useful information other than his usual mantra about how CF isn't RAD, Eclipse isn't a real IDE, blah blah blah. Most of us just ignore him at this point, you just can't take someone seriously when he starts making statements like these. Or posts about what someone like me has written elsewhere without bothering to do a simple forum search to see if there's anything to back it up.

Another great advantage of CF is how platform-independent it is. I'm currently moving my own sites to a VPS. Since it's CF, I can move to an Apache server which is dirt-cheap compared to running on Windows servers. And with low-cost CFML servers like BlueDragon and Railo now providing really great compatibility and performance to be true competitors to CF, the cost of doing this can be even lower than ever. There's plenty of information out there on the advantages of using CF if you look around....the Cf-Talk at houseoffusion.com has had a few discussions on this in the past as well.

[Newsgroup_User]

re: his usual mantra
about how CF isn't RAD, Eclipse isn't a real IDE, blah blah blah.

Not so sure the fibbing helps your cause Mary Jo - nobody said either of
those things. Eclipse is a real IDE and CF can be considered RAD. (even if
by virtue of it being an untyped dynamic scripting language)

re: Most of us
> just ignore him at this point

You got to be kidding right? I get more responses than most!!

re: > Another great advantage of CF is how platform-independent it is.

Yeah, thats a "great" advantage. I switch platforms evey other week, so
really comes in handy - Not. Being platform independant is not "great" or
"un-great", its merely an attribute to consider. Do you want to tap into the
power of your environment/OS or do you want to be platform neutral and lose
some of that power and flexibility? So a pretty silly comment really - in so
much as what you say is as much a disadvantage as an advantage.,

re: There's plenty of information out there on the advantages
> of using CF if you look around

I'd say it's pretty fair to say that most people in the typical cases, find
it hard to make a case for coldfusion these days. And that this explans why
it it used only in certain "hot spots" and not adopted in numbers that make
it anything more than a niche product aimed at newbies.






"MaryJo" <maryjo@cfwebstore.com> wrote in message
news:f9pmo5$844$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Don't worry about it Swampie....our anti-CF troll here just scours the
> forums
> looking for any topic that he can even possibly turn in that direction.
> You'll
> notice he didn't offer you any useful information other than his usual
> mantra
> about how CF isn't RAD, Eclipse isn't a real IDE, blah blah blah. Most of
> us
> just ignore him at this point, you just can't take someone seriously when
> he
> starts making statements like these. Or posts about what someone like me
> has
> written elsewhere without bothering to do a simple forum search to see if
> there's anything to back it up.
>
> Another great advantage of CF is how platform-independent it is. I'm
> currently
> moving my own sites to a VPS. Since it's CF, I can move to an Apache
> server
> which is dirt-cheap compared to running on Windows servers. And with
> low-cost
> CFML servers like BlueDragon and Railo now providing really great
> compatibility
> and performance to be true competitors to CF, the cost of doing this can
> be
> even lower than ever. There's plenty of information out there on the
> advantages
> of using CF if you look around....the Cf-Talk at houseoffusion.com has had
> a
> few discussions on this in the past as well.
>
>

[Newsgroup_User]

re: However, since I've had my first real exposure to .Net
in the last 12 months, I was only now beginning to question what I
understood I
had been told.

Typical story - some folk are stuck in CF mode and they only realise what
they are missing out on when they give true RAD products a go. I've seen
people pay thousands for CF and struggle to find decent hosting, then months
later they try out Visual Web Developer and are blown away by how easy and
truly RDA it is - they literally had no idea of data source controls or grid
view controls, instead had been sold on the <cfquery> notion of what RAD
is!!!

CF is awsome for lots of things - but speed and RAD are weaknesses these
days. Its strengths have more to do with synergy with other Adobe products
and quite a few other things -but most definitely not for it's minimal RAD
capabilities. I'd go a far s to say that this is provable fact and not just
conjecture.

"Swampie" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:f9p9ui$nca$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Sean,
>
> I'm afraid I don't have a name. I went to MAX06 mainly to talk to people
> about
> LiveCycle, not necessarily CF. It may have come from a representative
> stationed
> at one of those stands. I realise in a forum like this it becomes hearsay
> but
> the comment stuck with me. We were poised to move to .Net and I was
> wiling to
> take on board anything that would help me justify a continued investment
> in CF
> within our organization. However, since I've had my first real exposure to
> .Net
> in the last 12 months, I was only now beginning to question what I
> understood I
> had been told.
>
> I didn't intend to kick start an anti-CF discussion. CF is great. It's
> been my
> bread and butter for years. I was just having a bad day
>

[Newsgroup_User]

re: CF is a pest on so many levels, but almost unarguably it is SLOOOW to
work
with by comparison to truly rad platforms.

Yes, slow to develop with by comparison to what exists today in terms of rad
offereings. But not slow in terms of execution. Cf executes as fast as php,
if not faster due to it being semi compiled.

And Eclipse is really more of code "editor" than an actual "RAD" IDE. In
that it doesn't have a component based development system visually in the
IDE. Its generally considered that this is what consitutes RAD. CF tends to
think in terms of RAD being the existence of functions (or tags as it calls
them). This is not really what anybody in the industry would usually
consider a RAD product. Even Ruby On Rails, which is much more "RAD" like
than cf, is not really RAD either. (it code gen tools are run from the
command line and not an ide) And RAD is not always ideal either - VB6 being
an example of a true RAD platform that is not exactly respected by
professionals. Dot Net being an example of a true RAD platform that is
widely respected and adopted by professionals.


"Campag" <campag@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f9p0ko$bsm$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Mary Jo - could have swore you made a point last week how its a pain to
> have to download everything and how cf comes with everything out of the
> box. (may not have been you admittedly)
>
> CF is a pest on so many levels, but almost unarguably it is SLOOOW to work
> with by comparison to truly rad platforms. It has no IDE and eclipse look
> like amateur hour compared to whats available elsehwere.
>
>
>
> "MaryJo" <maryjo@cfwebstore.com> wrote in message
> news:f9ou9i$9d1$1@forums.macromedia.com...
>> If you're used to using something else, than obviously you are likely to
>> be
>> faster working in that, versus something you are less comfortable in. For
>> every
>> .Net disciple like our troll here, there are many CF developers that find
>> it
>> far faster to work in than other options. Part of that is because there
>> *are*
>> lots of tools for doing the basics. Just look at all the great frameworks
>> available... pick the best for you and/or your application and a lot of
>> the
>> work is done for you. Eclipse makes it even easier now with the
>> frameworks
>> browser. And for Crud...well, just get the Flexbuilder Extensions for
>> Eclipse.
>> They come with not only RDS support, but also wizards that will build out
>> all
>> your CRUD CFCs automatically. You can google to find others that have
>> been
>> written, there's a bunch out there, as well as the other's already listed
>> here.
>> Here's another one I ran across:
>>
>> http://icegen.riaforge.org/
>>
>>
>
>

[mjfour]

Try DatMgr http://www.bryantwebconsulting.com/cfcs/

[Newsgroup_User]

re: For every
.Net disciple like our troll here, there are many CF developers that find it
far faster to work in than other options.

What a crock - the number of .Net developers dwarfs the number of CF
developers. If you didn't know that, then you clealry have no concept or
insight into the industry you are in. Even most cf developer accept this
much. So that comment was pure guff.

Dot Net apps are built far far faster than CF apps, there's less code
plumbing required (due to web forms model) and more focus on solving
business problems (via event model). Plus the IDE fully supports you at
practically every level - even the free version!

I'm not saying Dot Net is teh answer for all solutions - I'm just saying its
faaster in every sense of the word fast an dthat cf is very laborious and
code intensive with relatively little support by comparison.

"MaryJo" <maryjo@cfwebstore.com> wrote in message
news:f9ou9i$9d1$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> If you're used to using something else, than obviously you are likely to
> be
> faster working in that, versus something you are less comfortable in. For
> every
> .Net disciple like our troll here, there are many CF developers that find
> it
> far faster to work in than other options. Part of that is because there
> *are*
> lots of tools for doing the basics. Just look at all the great frameworks
> available... pick the best for you and/or your application and a lot of
> the
> work is done for you. Eclipse makes it even easier now with the frameworks
> browser. And for Crud...well, just get the Flexbuilder Extensions for
> Eclipse.
> They come with not only RDS support, but also wizards that will build out
> all
> your CRUD CFCs automatically. You can google to find others that have been
> written, there's a bunch out there, as well as the other's already listed
> here.
> Here's another one I ran across:
>
> http://icegen.riaforge.org/
>
>

[JPfeff]

Great, another thread taken over by our resident Troll so he can argue with himself! I hope Microsnot pays you well for spouting all their marketing speak on these forums. Platform-independence is a disadvatange?? Spoken as only a true MS devotee would see it.

[Newsgroup_User]

re: Platform-independence is a disadvatange??

Who in the world ever said that?? Thats the most ludicrous comment I've
heard in a while. Platform independance can be an advantage OR a
disdavantage, so not smart to make blanket statements like that, or tell
fibs that others have said it.

Seems to me like you would be incapable of creating a list of advantages an
disadvantages of platform indepenance? Do you honestly consider yourself a
developer despite genuinely belieivng that there are only advnatges to
platform independance, and there are no disadvantages?? Thats rather odd.

At the most basic level - the choice is that of close integration with the
undelying platform and its core services versus the need to potentially
switch platform during the life time of the application. Can't you see that
for many people the prior is way more importnat than the latter? (And vica
versa for many others)

To add to that, CF is not platform independant. It runs on quite a few
platforms, but thats different altogther. For starters, you need different
version of it on different platforms, so clearly it is not platform
independant. It simply comes in different flavours. The Dot Net runtime and
the Java runtime are platform independant, but CF itself is not. In addition
to being platform independant, the dot net runtime also happens to be
language independant.

I appreciate that you are more likley a scripter/designer than an actual
developer, but I woudl still expect that some basic knowledge of computing
in the general sense would have trickled through during the normal course of
things.

To really drive home the point here - I, and many others, have constantly
had to switch from one language to another (example, upgrading cf code to
ruby or dot net, or vica versa) It happens fairly often. But not once, not
ever, have I been in a sitaution where somebody has said "Right, that web
app now needs to run on Linux. we just can't have it on a windows box any
longer!!" A very rare occurence indeed - so most poeple just don't sacrafice
the power and integration for the remote possibility that the operating
system soemhow becomes a no go. From a business point of view alone, its a
poor decision.


No offenc JPfeff - but you need to enlighten yourself with computing in
general. And telling porkies about what people have said isn't a good start.


"JPfeff" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:f9scim$e69$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Great, another thread taken over by our resident Troll so he can argue
> with
> himself! I hope Microsnot pays you well for spouting all their marketing
> speak
> on these forums. Platform-independence is a disadvatange?? Spoken as only
> a
> true MS devotee would see it.
>

[JPfeff]

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Newsgroup User
Who in the world ever said that?? Thats the most ludicrous comment I've
heard in a while.

---

Sure was, and you wrote it, several posts above. Of course, like you typically do, you jump all over me and insult my capabilities for pointing out your own ridiculous statements (without even allowing for the possibility that perhaps what you wrote was misunderstood, with your poor grammar and tendency to ramble on, this probably happens a LOT). And then make assumptions about what my skill level is, call me a liar, and so on. I just love how you try to go back on your own statements, and take any advantage to insult and denigrate the other people on this forum. You jump all over any inaccuracy in what someone writes, whether it has anything to really do with their point or not, but care little whether what you post is accurate or not. Need I even mention all the different user accounts? Yup, you sure are the epitome of truthfulness. Here's another of these absurd claims you like to make: "I'd go a far s to say that this is provable fact and not just conjecture." Okay fine, you want a debate...then as we say here in the US, put up or shut up. Let's see this so-called "proof" of yours. Until then, I see no reason to give you any more of my time.

John P

[Newsgroup_User]

re: Sure was, and you wrote it, several posts above.

Hmm, you'd have to point that out more specifically. I'm positive I made teh
very same point I just repeated ,and in a way that was very easy to follow.

re: call me a liar, and so on

You put words into my mouth, when we both know you knew exactly what my
point was. And we both (I hope) know that the point was grounded in actual
fact. Platform independance can be an advtaage or a disadvantage. Given
trends, it seems many don't care for it and opt for the power and
integration features of an underlying os. Theres not so many JSP sites or
even many java desktop applications, so relatively speaking we can safely
assume that platform independance is not a major factor for many people.

re: And then make assumptions about what my skill
> level is

Well, that was admittedly rude, and I genuinely apologise.

re: I just love how you try to go back on your
> own statements,

Again, you seem to be missing the point. At this point I find it even more
surprsing given my last post - you still seem to confused by what I wrote
and what you are repeatedly and mistakenly saying I wrote something else. At
the very least you are deliberately twisting things around to imply
something I never actually said. I hope now, third time lucky, it sinks in.

re: but care little whether what you post is accurate or not

I care a lot and make sure they are accurate. And in this particular case I
clearly seem to have a deeper understanding of things than you do.

re: these absurd claims you like to make: "I'd go a far s to say that this
is provable fact and not just conjecture."

It's entirely true -I would, and have, gone this far.

re: Okay fine, you want a debate...then as we say here in the US, put up or
shut up

I did put up, and I belive you have shut up. (In so much as you are failing
to admit where you made your mistake, which was the initial mix up about
what I said escalting to the point where you look foolish to not "get it"
yet.) I said what I claim I said, and you can go back and read it. You are
provably wrong beyond any shadow of doubt and my explanations are
clear,concise and can be readily absorbed by anybody with basic computing
concepts - I happen to think you do have these skills and concepts, and that
you do "get it" at this point (if not from the very beginning). But being
human, we don't like to be wrong.

re: Until then, I see no reason to give you any more of my time.

Me either - youd have to have grasped the concepts expressed at this point.
And even if not, you could save face by doing a google on the pros and cons
of platform independance. Once you do, guarnteed you'll undertand how its
both an advantage and a disadvantage - that can only serve to enlighten you.













"JPfeff" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:f9u5ci$gf5$1@forums.macromedia.com...
>

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Newsgroup User
> Who in the world ever said that?? Thats the most ludicrous comment I've
> heard in a while.

---

> Sure was, and you wrote it, several posts above. Of course, like you
> typically
> do, you jump all over me and insult my capabilities for pointing out your
> own
> ridiculous statements (without even allowing for the possibility that
> perhaps
> what you wrote was misunderstood, with your poor grammar and tendency to
> ramble
> on, this probably happens a LOT). And then make assumptions about what my
> skill
> level is, call me a liar, and so on. I just love how you try to go back on
> your
> own statements, and take any advantage to insult and denigrate the other
> people
> on this forum. You jump all over any inaccuracy in what someone writes,
> whether
> it has anything to really do with their point or not, but care little
> whether
> what you post is accurate or not. Need I even mention all the different
> user
> accounts? Yup, you sure are the epitome of truthfulness. Here's another of
> these absurd claims you like to make: "I'd go a far s to say that this is
> provable fact and not just conjecture." Okay fine, you want a
> debate...then as
> we say here in the US, put up or shut up. Let's see this so-called "proof"
> of
> yours. Until then, I see no reason to give you any more of my time.
>
> John P
>
>