CF and Mach-ii ??

[weblover]

What makes a Big Difference when coding with Plain CF when compared to working
with MACH-II applying OO design, it's been more structural you could say, but
what about performance when going thru all the hierarchies. am unsure of
Mach-ii's performance but am much confident with plain CF performance issues.

which one do u prefer? MACH-II or just Coldfusion when applying for
SOHO.(small scale projects). or Large Scale Projects.

and i saw none of the websites have much clear info on mach-ii.. (maybe am
weak at googling)..

any Inputs?

[mpwoodward *TMM*]

On 2005-07-05 21:12:29 -0500, "weblover" <chava_sree@yahoo.com> said:

> What makes a Big Difference when coding with Plain CF when compared to
> working with MACH-II applying OO design, it's been more structural you
> could say, but what about performance when going thru all the
> hierarchies. am unsure of Mach-ii's performance but am much confident
> with plain CF performance issues.
> which one do u prefer? MACH-II or just Coldfusion when applying for
> SOHO.(small scale projects). or Large Scale Projects.
>
> and i saw none of the websites have much clear info on mach-ii..
> (maybe am weak at googling)..
> any Inputs?

As the old saying goes, everything's a tradeoff. If your project is
extremely small you may not need Mach-II, but it really starts to shine
on small or medium projects that turn into large projects (as is so
often the case!). As a general comment, developing with frameworks has
a lot of benefits, from consistency of development methodology to
better maintainability and flexibility within the application codebase.

Concerning performance, Mach-II holds up extremely well because of the
native "load once" mechanism for much of the framework and your
application's objects within Mach-II. Is it as fast as plain old
procedural CF code? It depends on the specific situation, but in
application development there definitely has to be a balance between
raw speed and the maintainability of the application. If an
application is extremely fast but unmaintainable that's certainly not a
good situation. I can say that based on what I've done with Mach-II
and what I've heard from numerous others, Mach-II performance is not an
overriding concern. When the framework is in production mode it's
quite fast, and of course you can use the typical CF caching techniques
in a Mach-II application just as you can in any CF app to gain some
speed.

As for what I prefer, since even my small projects these days turn into
large ones pretty regularly, I tend to build most of my applications
with Mach-II. If you don't have much OO experience then Mach-II may be
a bit difficult to dig into, but the payback for the time invested to
learn OO and Mach-II is huge. I'm part of the team working on the next
release of Mach-II and one of the big areas we're going to improve is
documentation, so keep an eye on the Mach-II web site
([url]http://www.mach-ii.com[/url]) for further details soon.

If you're interested in developing with frameworks but don't have much
experience with OO, definitely check out Fusebox as well
([url]http://www.fusebox.org[/url]). Fusebox 4.1 has some really nice features
and is more approachable for people without an OO background.

Hope that helps,
Matt
--
Matt Woodward
[email]mpwoodward@gmail.com[/email]
Team Macromedia - ColdFusion