caching cfc's in structs and then calling them
redtopia
This is how I cache data type information for my application. Each
data type uses a CFC for data access, and don't want to keep having to
create a component each time I need to access data. So type
information and corresponding CFCs are cached.
Here's sample code that represents how one data type is cached:
<cfset dataTypes = StructNew ()>
<cfset dataTypes.article = StructNew ()>
<cfset dataTypes.article.name = "Article">
<cfset dataTypes.article.handler = createObject ("component",
"types.article").init ()>
Here's my question: What's the best way to access the handler?
I'm currently doing this (the variable "type" specifies the type of
data being accessed):
<cfif StructKeyExists (type)>
<typeInfo = StructFind (dataTypes, type)>
</cfif>
and then to get data:
<cfset data = typeInfo.handler.getData (id)>
I'm guessing that StructFind will return a copy of the struct, which
will cause the handler component to become duplicated in memory. If
that's true, how should I do this without duplicating the component in
memory?
Matt Quackenbush
redtopia
the documentation for StructFind () says that it returns the value
associated with a key in a struct. It's not clear that it returns a
reference to the struct, or the value of that struct. I guess I can
write some code to verify.
redtopia
Jared Rypka-Hauer
J
Sean Corfield
> <cfif StructKeyExists (type)>
> <typeInfo = StructFind (dataTypes, type)>
> </cfif>
Why not simply:
<cfif structKeyExists( dataTypes, type)>
<cfset typeInfo = dataTypes[ type ] />
</cfif>
--
Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
Railo Technologies, Inc. -- http://getrailo.com/
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood
redtopia
the C++ world. Do you think it's more efficient to access struct
members that way as opposed to using StructFind ()? I would assume
they would compile to an equiv. assembly. Structs are implemented as
hash tables, so CF probably does the same thing either way.
On Jun 7, 3:41 pm, Sean Corfield <seancorfi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > <cfif StructKeyExists (type)>
> > <typeInfo = StructFind (dataTypes, type)>
> > </cfif>
>
> Why not simply:
>
> <cfif structKeyExists( dataTypes, type)>
> <cfset typeInfo = dataTypes[ type ] />
> </cfif>
> --
> Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
> An Architect's View --http://corfield.org/
Tom Chiverton
> Do you think it's more efficient to access struct
> members that way as opposed to using StructFind ()? I would assume
> they would compile to an equiv. assembly. Structs are implemented as
> hash tables, so CF probably does the same thing either way.
likely cheaper than your time :-)
--
Tom Chiverton
Developer
Tom.Ch...@halliwells.com
3 Hardman Square, Manchester, M3 3EB
****************************************************
This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at Halliwells LLP, 3 Hardman Square, Spinningfields, Manchester, M3 3EB. A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office together with a list of those non members who are referred to as partners. We use the word “partner” to refer to a member of the LLP, or an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualifications. Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
CONFIDENTIALITY
This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 2500.
For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.Halliwells.com.
redtopia
On Jun 9, 2:56 am, Tom Chiverton <tom.chiver...@halliwells.com> wrote:
> On Monday 07 Jun 2010 23:23:49 redtopia wrote:
>
> > Do you think it's more efficient to access struct
> > members that way as opposed to using StructFind ()? I would assume
> > they would compile to an equiv. assembly. Structs are implemented as
> > hash tables, so CF probably does the same thing either way.
>
> Are you so close to the performance edge it matters ? If so, more RAM/CPU is
> likely cheaper than your time :-)
>
> --
>
> Tom Chiverton
> Developer
>
>
> ****************************************************
>
> This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.
>
> Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at Halliwells LLP, 3 Hardman Square, Spinningfields, Manchester, M3 3EB. A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office together with a list of those non members who are referred to as partners. We use the word “partner” to refer to a member of the LLP, or an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualifications. Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY
>
> This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 2500.
>