Transistioning from cf to asp.net

[Marlon Moyer]

I've become very comfortable with a method of writing CF code lately.
I write CFC's as bean objects, create managers for those beans and
then create DAO's for managers to access the db.  I'd like to try some
asp.net stuff, but everytime I look at examples, it's all about how to
quickly take data from a db and throw it in a datagrid.  Now, that is
very nice, but it just looks like a quick way to some hard to maintain
code.  So my question is, how easy is it to use my current methodology
in asp.net?

Is it relatively easy to have the data components work on objects
instead of tables in a db?  Do you lose all the wizard form creation
tools when you use objects?  What do you think are the benefits over
CF?

Thanks

--
Marlon

"Only a Sith thinks in absolutes!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:44:1605
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/44
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:44
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=17837.14401.44
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

[Kwang Suh]

>I've become very comfortable with a method of writing CF code lately.
>I write CFC's as bean objects, create managers for those beans and
>then create DAO's for managers to access the db.  I'd like to try some
>asp.net stuff, but everytime I look at examples, it's all about how to
>quickly take data from a db and throw it in a datagrid.  Now, that is
>very nice, but it just looks like a quick way to some hard to maintain
>code.  So my question is, how easy is it to use my current methodology
>in asp.net?

Here's a nice article that follows what you're doing:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnaspp/html/CustEntCls.asp

>Is it relatively easy to have the data components work on objects
>instead of tables in a db?

Yes.  Anything that implements IEnumerable is bindable.  A great example shown above is the CollectionBase type.

> Do you lose all the wizard form creation tools when you use objects?

They don't work all that well in the first place.  VS2005 has much better wizards, if you're into that sort of thing.

> What do you think are the benefits over CF?

You get to use a real OO language.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:44:1606
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/44
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:44
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=17837.14401.44
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

[Marlon Moyer]

Thanks, this is exactly what I'm trying to figure out, and yes, I am
playing around with the 2005 beta right now.  That's what got me
interested in .Net.



On 5/24/05, Kwang Suh <ksuh@...> wrote:

> >I've become very comfortable with a method of writing CF code lately.
> >I write CFC's as bean objects, create managers for those beans and
> >then create DAO's for managers to access the db.  I'd like to try some
> >asp.net stuff, but everytime I look at examples, it's all about how to
> >quickly take data from a db and throw it in a datagrid.  Now, that is
> >very nice, but it just looks like a quick way to some hard to maintain
> >code.  So my question is, how easy is it to use my current methodology
> >in asp.net?
>
> Here's a nice article that follows what you're doing:
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnaspp/html/CustEntCls.asp
>
> >Is it relatively easy to have the data components work on objects
> >instead of tables in a db?
>
> Yes.  Anything that implements IEnumerable is bindable.  A great example shown above is the CollectionBase type.
>
> > Do you lose all the wizard form creation tools when you use objects?
>
> They don't work all that well in the first place.  VS2005 has much better wizards, if you're into that sort of thing.
>
> > What do you think are the benefits over CF?
>
> You get to use a real OO language.
>
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:44:1607
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/44
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:44
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=17837.14401.44
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

[Kwang Suh]

One thing with that article - nullable types aren't implemented properly in the beta, so don't bother with those examples.

>Thanks, this is exactly what I'm trying to figure out, and yes, I am
>playing around with the 2005 beta right now.  That's what got me
>interested in .Net.
>
>
>
>On 5/24/05, Kwang Suh <ksuh@...> wrote:
>>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:44:1608
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/44
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:44
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=17837.14401.44
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54