I completely understand what it’s like to reach the frustration point and mash together an approach that simplifies your development but doesn’t necessarily adhere to standards. My advice would be to try to keep fighting the fight and avoid that.
Let’s chat offline and see if we can apply some of this stuff to GK. I think you’re close, you just need to have that “breakthrough” moment and you’re almost there.
]]>OOP gets a bit easier after you do it but still a ton of things to learn. I still don’t think I’m doing it right but there’s just so much conflicting information out there about what it what and what should be OOP in CF that I just said “screw it” and choose the parts I like and smashed em together.
]]>1) Document repositories with meta data for which users with varying permission levels need to perform CRUD operations including searches and display of PDFs, spreadsheets and Word Docs. We use gateways and the latest CF8 AJAX and customized Ext capabilities.
2) Multiple systems that involve things like procurements, configuration management, action item tracking, issue tracking, etc. and their meta data which are manipulated again via CRUD operations including searches.
Also I’d be interested in any references you’d recommend that might help me in taking my next step. Real examples would also be great.
]]>But you’re right, we just have different viewpoints on the matter. It was just important to me that people are aware of the other viewpoints.
@Mike — I’ll think about it. I might feel better about it if we could maybe wait a week and also get Dan or Sean C on with me.
@Micky — man, I just realized I misspelled your name TWICE in that last post! Sorry Micky!!!
]]>I definitely keep an open mind about anything and everything that comes my way. I get my butt handed to me on a daily basis with new ways of thinking about and approaching software development 
Regarding interfaces and their “usefulness” I have some very strong opinions of it rooted in a lot of experience. Apologies if I came off a bit strong, I don’t mean to, but you have to know thats where it’s coming from. It’s the whole reasoning of suggesting to return “any” or an extremely generic type like that web-inf component type because its “flexible” is not right.
And to your point about interface techniques you’re totally right. You have three main choices of how you want to code to an “interface”. Most of the time you want to choose an actual interface construct unless you need to inherit some state which means you can use an Abstract Class. The last resort should be inheritance, bleh.
Would love to have you on man, it would be good to openly debate this topic. Bring some friends!
Nonetheless, I stand by it and encourage every single CF developer out there to utilize interfaces period, regardless of language. It will make you a much better software engineer, I promise.
]]>I’ll simply end by restating that interface-based development has many, many benefits and the hybrid nature of CF means that developers can leverage those benefits very easily. We are definitely going to have to agree to disagree on this point.
]]>Guys — I’m flattered that you want to have me on. But I’m no OO guru and I’m not really debating your position. There’s nothing wrong with using interfaces if that’s your preference. But I also think there’s nothing wrong with NOT using them.
Besides, I think I would feel outnumbered if I came on! ]]>