We have a brand new look! Take a tour with us and explore the latest updates on Adobe Support Community.
I have tested a files with around 3000 lines of codes in CF Builder 3, i can open this file without any such problem, it may be your environment specific issue.
Please crosscheck any other such cfm file and observe its behavior..
Verified this with a few other guys to make sure this is not just my environment.
After a closer look, it looks like this file with 3000 lines of code is including (cfinclude) many other files and we think CF Builder 3 is trying to load them as well.
In Dreamweaver above scenario could be turned off. And I do not see any options in CF Builder 3 to do that.
kindly let me know or crosscheck following :-
Hope its working now at your end..
I know I'm using an Adobe product because 4 years later this is STILL a problem
Jascomp, there’s not always an inherent inability of CFB to read such a large file. As was discussed in the previous messages, there is often an explanation for things—either in the config of CFB (or perhaps in the config of the connection of CFB to any server, if it’s relying on such a connection), or in the nature of the code.
But note also that this is referring to CFB 3. Are you saying you’re having a similar problem on CFB2018? Or if CFB2016, is it with the latest updates available for that?
If you felt it was flat not working, would you be interested in a free 15 minute online shared desktop session to look into it? Adobe may offer it, but I would as well. I have helped many people solve what seemed insurmountable and inexplicable problems.
@Charlie I'm using CFB2016 (Build 302777). Did not realize that CFB2018 was available. I will try an upgrade. However, I will say that I've been using CFB since version 1 and this problem periodically creeps up in every version (at least for me). This has been across multiple machines, OS, etc. I appreciate the support offer but for me the problem is not consistent enough. Right now it's working great. Tomorrow it may randomly start generating long pauses and do that for an hour then stop. I use Eclipse for Java development as well and do not have this issue editing large class files. However that is using a newer version of Eclipse. Periodically over the years I've searched for a solution, but I've never found one. I plan to switch to VS Code anyway. Appreciate the reply.
If I recall correctly, this issue was more apparent when you have an entire file system mapped to a drive and you are accssing large files from that mapped drive with cfbuilder.
I gave up on cfbuilder and still use dreamweaver.
Charlie, is it?!
techuser and @jascomp, thank you for sharing your experience with ColdFusion Builder. One remark I should like to add is that you make no reference to bug-fixes. Therefore, you're assuming implicitly that Builder development has stood still across a period of years. That is, of course, not so.
ColdFusion Builder, like every other software used by developers, evolves frequently. The issues you mention have likely been solved in the current version. If so, then reports such as yours would no doubt have contributed to the solution.
So, I would say, report in the bug database any issues you find. Follow up their progress, and have faith that you are contributing to improve the software.
@bkbk. for me not getting enough positive response or even a response that it would it be addressed in the future was enough to not continue to use cfbuilder.
I just felt it was built in a cheap way over eclipse with all th bugs not addressed bfr releasing - that our company actually paid for 3 developers license. It was just a waste of company money.
I actually enjoy using CFBuilder (most of the time). Despite the bugs I've found it to be a handy editor. I've used many Adobe products over the years and have consistently found their support and bug resolution lacking at best. More often I find my solutions within the online community. As a developer I understand that bugs are a part of software. I get it. However, having those bugs move from version to version with plenty of reports to Adobe and no resolution is apparently just how Adobe operates. The reason I've stuck with Adobe and specifically ColdFusion despite what a reasonable person would tolerate is that I maintain a lot of legacy code that is simply never going to be refactored and the community. As you can see from previous responses; community members like Charlie Arehart step up and pick up the slack left by Adobe.
Update: 3 days into using CF Builder 2018. So far no issues.
Good to hear about the success with cfb 2018 so far, and thanks for the kind regards, indeed on behalf of the many folks in the community who help, as you allude to.
@charlie. I do not think it’s ok to accept a buggy product when ppl r paying premium for it and continue to use it less productivity hoping in the next version bugs will be addressed.
I only know one person who would buy a denim with zipper that sorta works and continue to live with it hoping next year the denim will have a better zipper abd then buy it again.
I can see denim having some unexpected wrinkles but a poorlot made denim - why would u buy it let alone use it for years. There is no rational behind it!
If a a product is rolled out of development to ptoduction, then I could “get it”. Softwares r buggy. And maybe thats how it has been working for Adobe from what I hear from u.
@jascomp. Not sure I understand if u burnt ur tounge and thought product was just fine 3 days in bcz ur all numb now or it was just an unrealized commotion from having to sip a hot cup of joe.
@TechUser I think my rational (or perhaps better said: my clients rational) is that the zipper works 99% of the time and works well. There's just no ROI in ripping it off to replace it with one that might work 99.9% of the time. LOL though you may be right in that I'm now numb to dealing with Adobe bugs .
Techfuser, you seem burnt out, or burnt about CFB. OK, we get it. You don't need to keep making your point. Move on to something else and let others be. You really don't need to protect the world from suffering with CFB, because I promise you there are people who use it and have no such problems.
And I remain here helping people who want help. (And yes, jascomp, my offer is open to anyone who would assert having the sort of problem you did.)
It's been my experience that most problems DO have an explanation and a resolution, and I tend NOT to presume that the cause is always "buggy software". CFB in particular has complexity because first it's Eclipse and then it's CFB on top of it. (And I stopped obsessing over that several years ago. It is what it is and won't change in the foreseeable future). That introduces challenges both from Eclipse itself (and some things never documented in CFB but only about Eclipse itself), as well as some challenges introduced BY CFB that are unique to it (compared to other Eclipse plugins).
And so there are MANY reasons something could fail for one person and not another, starting with CFB configuration, then going to "server" configuration within it (and the server you are connecting to, and the network over which you are connecting, if not local). Then of course there can be differences in the nature of code people do.
Perhaps most important, folks (trying to understand problems or help others) need to remember that CFB is not acting as an editor (when you connect your "project "to a "server" within CFB). It then is acting as an IDE, and even so a more powerful one than any other editor possibly can be--because with that Server configuration, it is reaching out TO that server (whether localhost or over the network) to get things like the CF admin mappings and custom tags, so that it renders and interprets (and searched and shows) things JUST LIKE THE CODE WOULD IF RUN IN CF. At that point, it can't just "look at files" relative to the code directory being edited, because CF would not "just look at files relative to the code directory.
For instance, some know about how CF "searches" for CFCs at runtime, including in and relative to: the current directory, the web site root, the mappings defined in application.cfc, the mappings defined in the CF Admin, the CF Admin custom tag paths, and so on. No other editor does that because no other editor offers the option to be configured to reach out to the server to get and use that info.
So I'm just saying that some problems people have are because they don't understand this connection between a project and a server, and how CFB may use that connection (or have trouble with it), thus making something as simply as "opening a large file" fail, because it's doing things that they never realized it would be doing. And some of those things happen in the background even when you are not "asking it to do anything", such as other than "just opening a file".
Hope that may help someone.
@Charlie does the server connection also apply if you do not configure a ColdFusion server within the project? I run my code locally, but do not configure the ColdFusion Server within the CFB project (i.e. empty value)
Jascomp, no, by definition. (If no server defines in project, there is no server connection. ) If you may be saying, "so that can't have been my problem", I don't disagree. I said that was one of many config options (and coding practices) that could affect a problem of opening a large file.
Again, if you may feel the urge to confirm what it was, I'm still open. But if you want to just count your blessings with cfb 2018--or wait until it may happen there, I'd understand. I'm just saying that in nearly every case I've seen the problem has not been some inherent but in cfb that was insurmountable.
And that goes to techfuser's next surely comment, as I will address in a moment.
@jasconp. if its wotking for u now 99% of the time then maybe u should have waited bfr reacting too quickly with ur initial post. Obviously now u seem to be happy enough.
For me when I started this product at its inception, it was so buggy that we felt there was no point of looking at it agian.
And with Adobes recent direction with other products like Flash, it is clear for me to think Adobe will not have their A team on products like this compared to a Photoshop. My 2cents.
@TechFuser Glad you found tools that work better for you. Adobe like any company is going to focus on what generates revenue. In this case that does appear to be other higher profile products. Personally I've never found any Adobe product I've used over the years to be so buggy that it was unusable. I think you read too much into my initial quip. I wasn't completely disillusioned as you appear to be; just a bit frustrated to still be encountering an issue that has been around for quite some time. To be fair I still encounter Microsoft and Oracle bugs that have been around for years (and it is just as frustrating). Just the nature of software bro
@jascomp. Well I can tell u when this product came out of mother womb we didn’t know what to do with it but adopt the old dino dreamweaver.
maybe ur quip was quip-ical enough that now ur saying u don’t need any help with it.
Oracle is staying behind their product lines whether it’s oracle or Java. I only see Adobe is wanting to stay behind photoshop than ur so far working cfbuilder.
@TechUser I'm happy "enough". I'll carve the code into stone using a hammer and chisel if that is what the client wants. Right now the problem seems resolved, but as previously stated I've had this problem (or at least a similar manifestation of it) in every version of CFBuilder since version 1.0. So, no I'm not confident that the issue is resolved. You're correct that a paid for software upgrade should not be the solution. However, for expedience it's probably worth it for some to simply go that route and move on. I'm sure Charlie Arehart support offer extends to ANYONE having this problem. If you can reliably reproduce the issue for him; I'm positive he can find the solution.
@charlie. I moved on alright given Adobes future goal; that’s the wise thing to do!
I am only trying to make a point of ur pointless excuse that you would expect a product to be buggy and still pay for it.
Techfuser, I never said anything about anyone accepting let alone paying for buggy software. Dude, take your axe and grind it somewhere else, and stop putting words in my mouth. By both, you are showing yourself to be nothing but a troll here.
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7 active, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone