Hacker News Reader

Comment by rbanffy | Hacker News Reader

Legacy code is a thing. I fear the merging of template and logic that CF encouraged (and I don't think it's currently discouraged enough) results in hard to test and hard to reutilize code.

Since hard to test and, hence, untestable codebases are the hardest to migrate, I'd assume web applications that depend too much on Cold Fusion (or PHP, ASP or Model 1 JSP) will remain in those technologies until the whole thing is rewritten from scratch.

View on HN

CFWheels uses RoR MVC concepts, so separation from data/logic/display as you'd expect. This (major) second version has it's own built in test suite for TDD, RESTful routing etc, and the whole core has been written in CFScript which is "tag free". My point being that any modern CFML web app can easily engage with best practice development - that's of course not to say there aren't a lot of legacy apps out there as you rightly mention.

I'm not knocking CF, it put food on my dinner plate for many years. I used to use fusebox (MVC with all the terms renamed) and had manageable code. I could knock out a CF based web app much faster than I can today with C# ASP.NET. The only reason we switched was the availability of developers willing to work on CF. You can find C# people everywhere.

True for a lot of a lot of older stuff. But, on the CF apps I've been supporting, I've been reworking things to minimize the actual CF component, reducing it to APIs as much as possible. I suspect I'm not the only coder setting up to move away fast once Adobe drops it.

And now we have JSX

Reply on news.ycombinator.com