My Secret Life as a Spaghetti Coder
home | about | contact | privacy statement
A thought occurred to me today- just because something doesn't offer all you need, doesn't mean you can't put it to good reuse. This goes back to Sean Corfield's post about why you should avoid the not-invented-here syndrome, my own post about why I thought I would release cfrails (and some of the decisions therein), and a multitude of others who realize that reinventing the wheel is not generally productive.

I had the realization today (though, I must admit it is quite obvious!) that there would be nothing wrong with adding an extra layer of abstraction, which would in turn add the features you needed to some other product/library/code. So when I thought "well, I can't use Transfer or Reactor" (what ever happened to Arf!?) because they didn't provide all the metadata I needed, I could have still built on top of them. I guess the thought never occurred to me back then.

In any case, it has now. Although I'm far enough along that I don't think doing this will save me any more time, it's something I plan on investigating- at the very least, it could provide a familiar API to use (and of course, the framework would be generating any XML files rather than having the programmer modify them).

So basically, if you think you don't want to use a pre-made product - at least you should look into the possibility of building on top of it.

Hey! Why don't you make your life easier and subscribe to the full post or short blurb RSS feed? I'm so confident you'll love my smelly pasta plate wisdom that I'm offering a no-strings-attached, lifetime money back guarantee!


Comments
Leave a comment

I've been playing with this a lot too. For instance, Steve Bryants DataMgr is a good candidate for building an ORM as it takes care of lots of the SQ abstraction so you can focus on providing the OO piece.

That said, it is a balance between the costs and benefits. The biggest issue in CF is that none of the OSS projects are very mature - there is nothing like Hibernate where you look at it and say "that would take me years", although of course, the more we all work together on a smaller set of projects, the closer we'll come.

Will be interesting to see how things develop!

Posted by Peter Bell on Mar 31, 2007 at 09:01 AM UTC - 5 hrs

"none of the OSS projects are very mature - there is nothing like Hibernate where you look at it and say "that would take me years""

I think that is generally true of just about anything you'll build in CF versus Java =)

Posted by Sam on Mar 31, 2007 at 10:18 AM UTC - 5 hrs

Leave a comment

Leave this field empty
Your Name
Email (not displayed, more info?)
Website

Comment:

Subcribe to this comment thread
Remember my details
Google
Web CodeOdor.com

Me
Picture of me

Topics
.NET (19)
AI/Machine Learning (14)
Answers To 100 Interview Questions (10)
Bioinformatics (2)
Business (1)
C and C++ (6)
cfrails (22)
ColdFusion (78)
Customer Relations (15)
Databases (3)
DRY (18)
DSLs (11)
Future Tech (5)
Games (5)
Groovy/Grails (8)
Hardware (1)
IDEs (9)
Java (38)
JavaScript (4)
Linux (2)
Lisp (1)
Mac OS (4)
Management (15)
MediaServerX (1)
Miscellany (76)
OOAD (37)
Productivity (11)
Programming (168)
Programming Quotables (9)
Rails (31)
Ruby (67)
Save Your Job (58)
scriptaGulous (4)
Software Development Process (23)
TDD (41)
TDDing xorblog (6)
Tools (5)
Web Development (8)
Windows (1)
With (1)
YAGNI (10)

Resources
Agile Manifesto & Principles
Principles Of OOD
ColdFusion
CFUnit
Ruby
Ruby on Rails
JUnit



RSS 2.0: Full Post | Short Blurb
Subscribe by email:

Delivered by FeedBurner